advantages and disadvantages of online learning during covid 19 essay

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
• Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Advantages and Disadvantages of E-Learning Innovations during COVID-19 Pandemic in Higher Education in Poland

Associated data.

Data are contained within the article.

The paper presents the results of the research on the advantages and disadvantages of innovative e-learning during the COVID-19 pandemic in higher education. In the first stage, an internet questionnaire was used for the study. The research was carried out in Poland on a sample of 621 students. The results allowed the researchers to determine variables that are important for the proper implementation of innovative e-learning, and the emergent perspectives for this form of education after the end of the COVID-19 pandemic. Among the most significant disadvantages, there was a lack of direct contact with colleagues, difficulties with teaching practical subjects, lack of direct contact with the teacher, and too much time spent in front of a computer/telephone or other mobile device. The most important correlations included the following: students satisfied with e-learning assess the advantages highly and the disadvantages lower; all the advantages of innovative e-learning are positively correlated with the student’s assessment of the ease of acquiring content in e-learning, and negatively correlated with the student’s assessment of the ease of acquiring content in traditional education; the easier the student assimilates innovative e-learning content, the higher the student’s evaluation of the advantages of e-learning; students who perceive e-learning content as difficult to absorb have low motivation to learn remotely; the better the student knows information technology, the more highly the student evaluates the advantages of innovative e-learning; the better resources to participate in e-learning activities the student has, the higher the student’s evaluation of the advantages of e-learning; the more often innovative e-learning solutions are used in a given university, the better the student assesses the advantages of e-learning.

1. Introduction

During the COVID-19 pandemic, many universities around the world, including Polish ones, which previously used mainly traditional education [ 1 ], were forced to switch to e-learning. This new, innovative solution can be used in many universities to adjust the way of learning to the changing situation. The perception and evaluation of e-learning by students during the pandemic, and the identification of the advantages and disadvantages of this type of education, are interesting and worthy of investigation. It is also important to determine what variables may influence students’ perception of particular advantages and disadvantages of e-learning. This knowledge will allow researchers to determine variables that are important for the proper implementation of e-learning, and the understand the perspectives which are posed for this form of education after the end of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Based on the analysis of the literature on the advantages and disadvantages of e-learning [ 2 , 3 , 4 ], comparison of traditional and e-learning [ 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 ], practical e-learning [ 9 ], improving quality of teaching [ 10 , 11 ], e-learning innovative tools [ 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 ] and services usage in e-learning [ 19 , 20 ], we have found the research gap in terms of advantages and disadvantages of innovative e-learning in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is worth noting that there has been no research about variables influencing the advantages and disadvantages of innovative e-learning. In the research, the following goals were set:

• • G1: To analyze the advantages and disadvantages of innovative e-learning that are the most important from the point of view of university students.
• • G2: To analyze the relation between the advantages and disadvantages of innovative e-learning at universities.
• • G3: To analyze the relation between the evaluation of advantages and disadvantages of innovative e-learning and the ease of acquiring content in traditional learning and e-learning by students.
• • G4: To analyze the relationship between the assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of innovative e-learning, and other investigated variables.

To realize the mentioned goals, the following scientific expectations were formulated:

• • E1: The most important advantages of innovative e-learning refer to the reduction in travel time and study expenses.
• • E2: Good contact with teachers and the teachers’ ability to communicate about the use of remote tools are important variables positively influencing e-learning.
• • E3: The easier the student assimilates e-learning content, the higher the student evaluates the advantages of e-learning.
• • E4: The better the student knows information technology, the higher the student evaluates the advantages of e-learning.
• • E5: The better resources to participate in e-learning activities the student has, the higher the student evaluates the advantages of e-learning.
• • E6: The more often innovative e-learning solutions are used in a given university, the better the student assesses the advantages of e-learning.

2. Literature Review

E-learning is a method that has been known and used for many years, long antedating the COVID-19 pandemic [ 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 ]. The term e-learning has emerged because of the integration of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in education fields [ 22 ]. The development of computer technology has made remote tools and methods more and more popular—this is also the case in education. Despite the fact that educational institutions mostly use traditional methods to provide knowledge to students, it has been predicted that e-learning’s popularity will grow [ 25 ]. According to Global Market Insight [ 25 ], the COVID-19 pandemic has had a positive impact on e-learning industry revenue. Employee safety concerns have encouraged corporations to implement work-from-home practices. The telecommunications and broadband sector has increased accessibility to economical internet connectivity plans. Nearly 4.9 billion individuals use the internet globally, while in 2019 it was 4.1 billion. As the number of internet users increases, more and more people will be able to access e-learning platforms to take courses or complete degrees. In addition to education, the use of remote work methods [ 26 , 27 , 28 ] and tools [ 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 ] is also observed in different work areas. The COVID-19 pandemic had a strong impact on e-learning popularization and the change in the usage of innovative e-learning tools in university education [ 33 ]. According to research [ 33 ], the percentage of students familiar with the analyzed e-learning tools has increased significantly during the pandemic. There has been a visible rise, especially in the usage of the following tools: MS Teams, Zoom, and Google Classroom. Students have also used e-learning platforms. It is worth noting that e-learning tools were not used on a large scale before the pandemic [ 34 , 35 ].

On the other hand, the younger generation has been raised with the usage of mobile technology and the Internet. Children with smartphones follow YouTube channels, play games, and record and post videos—this is something common these days. Young people’s getting used to using mobile devices may make it difficult for them to focus on traditional lectures. Because of this, educators should also strive to use modern technologies and apply them to teaching purposes and involve students in lectures [ 36 , 37 ]. Mobile technologies enhance the e-learning opportunity [ 38 ]. Remote education meets the needs of young generations because, among other reasons, it is based on mobile technologies [ 39 ]. E-learning is a great opportunity to better adapt to the expectations of modern students [ 40 ]. Furthermore, social media can also be used for education [ 41 ]. However, it should be emphasized that e-learning should be accompanied by high standards of quality [ 42 ]. The usage of information technologies at universities is very attractive and fruitful; however, it does not always mean that the implementation of e-learning is easy and is done correctly [ 43 ]. Additionally, changes in learning can also lead to increased sustainability at universities [ 44 ].

The introduction of remote education is not sufficient if it is not followed by good quality content, teaching method, materials, ways of verifying knowledge and skills, and last but not least, competent academics [ 45 ]. Bylieva et al. [ 46 ] noticed that an important parameter that influences the behavior of students and their educational progress in general is precisely the focus on practice. In Assareh and Bidokht’s [ 47 ] research, four kinds of e-learning barriers were outlined. They include the following barriers:

• • Learners—who can have financial problems, motivation issues, problems with assessment of their progress, isolation from peers’ matters, inadequate skills and experience in distance learning, and problems with affection and the social domain;
• • Teachers—with barriers such as lack of adequate knowledge about the e-teaching environment, difficulty in the assessment of progress in the different domain;
• • Curriculum—ambiguity, quality, resources, teaching process, evaluation;
• • School—in this area, there are organizational and structural factors.

Overcoming the groups of barriers mentioned above requires more cooperation from such participants as curriculum developers, teachers, students’ parents, social authorities, technology specialists, and also the preparation of virtual and real interaction between students, teachers, and society [ 47 ]. According to Becker et al. [ 48 ] the critical issue in order to successfully implement e-learning is to ensure that users know about the nature of e-learning and to address concerns about its validity and usefulness. Providing opportunities to actively engage with the material, and potentially with other learners, is also very important. In many cases, it can only be accomplished by implementing a quality learning product that can then be experienced by individual learners. What is more, people responsible for e-learning adoption need to be aware of the fact that organizational issues such as support and time allocation should be part of any strategy to adopt e-learning. Knowing the barriers to the implementation of e-learning will help to successfully overcome them.

Some of the barriers are related to the disadvantages of e-learning. Hence, the identification of disadvantages, but also advantages [ 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 ], of e-learning is an important issue [ 53 , 54 , 55 ]. There is much research on the topic of advantages and disadvantages, to name a few (e.g., [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 ]). Some of the research [ 9 , 10 , 11 ] is focused on the challenges and advantages of e-learning. There is also more detailed research which discusses the positive sides of e-learning with the use of WhatsApp [ 12 , 13 , 14 ], YouTube [ 19 , 20 ], tablet PCs [ 17 , 18 ], and smartphones [ 15 , 16 ]. Some authors [ 7 , 8 ] compare e- and traditional education in terms of pros and cons. From the university’s point of view, e-learning leads to some organizational savings, better use of the infrastructure, and increased flexibility in time [ 56 ]. More significantly, this type of learning offers greater opportunities for post-graduate study, and better attendance at classes [ 57 ]. On the other hand, e-learning leads to limited interpersonal contacts and isolation from peers, which might have affected the mental well-being of students [ 58 ]. It is worth noting that the results of research conducted on smaller research samples differs from each other; namely some results show that e-learning does not necessary cause isolation [ 59 ], and some other research pays attention to isolation among teachers [ 60 ]. An important issue related to the quality of e-learning is verification of the results, and this topic is broadly described in the literature, including e-cheating and its prevention [ 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 ]. It is worth emphasizing that both traditional [ 1 ] and e-learning [ 7 ] have many positive sides and it is difficult to clearly define which of them is unambiguously better.

The possibility exists of using innovative learning solutions based on the use of widespread e-learning in recent years, especially due to the COVID-19 pandemic [ 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 ]. Using e-learning, we could base our approach upon the traditional innovation approach or use open innovation [ 75 , 76 , 77 ]. We can describe open innovation as a combination of external and internal ideas and a path to develop something, especially using new technology [ 78 ]. In e-learning, the open innovation approach can base its approach upon mixing external solutions—computer programs, applications, and technical solutions—with the internal experiences from within the organization [ 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 ]. This approach can lead to an increase in the effectiveness of innovative solutions used in the university’s learning. It is especially important to look for experience and expertise outside of the organization, because in the open innovation approach, external experts can create a significant amount of added value. Many e-learning solutions have an open character because we can use them without paying for them if we do not need the full version of the application. Such is the case, for example, with the use of Zoom platform in e-learning [ 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 ].

Usually, when discussing advantages and disadvantages, the authors refer to the period before the pandemic; however, some research on e-learning during the COVID-19 pandemic has also been published lately. These works usually discuss the process of organization and the application of the e-learning method and tools in the education field [ 57 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 ]. Some authors [ 89 , 90 , 96 , 97 ] noticed that the implementation of remote learning in universities was a great challenge. Universities, even technological ones, did not expect a rapid need to switch to distance learning [ 98 ] from traditional learning [ 1 ]. Therefore, to continue courses during the so-called waves of the pandemic, education had to face the challenge of preparing and operating educational or videoconferencing platforms, acquiring e-learning skills and knowledge, and overcoming barriers, as well as resistance to the new. One important issue is also the motivation of students to learn online. Authors [ 99 , 100 ] conducted a study identifying factors influencing student motivation in remote learning during the pandemic.

Based on the analysis of research publications, it can be claimed that there is much research on the advantages and disadvantages of e-learning that was done before the pandemic. There is also some research on e-learning during the pandemic. However, there is a lack of papers that discuss and identify advantages and disadvantages of e-learning during the pandemic of COVID-19. We found only two papers that refer to the topic of pros and cons of e-learning during the pandemic. The first one [ 53 ], is focused only on advantages. The other one [ 101 ] discusses the challenges and opportunities, therefore it can be treated as discussing advantages. However, there are no satisfactory studies on identifying and evaluating advantages and disadvantages by students during the pandemic of COVID-19. Therefore, it was justified to conduct research on this topic.

3. Methodology

The paper presents the results of the research conducted in Poland in December 2021. The participants included a sample of 621 students from Polish universities. An internet—Google—questionnaire was used for the study. Google Forms offers survey administration, which means that in addition to the possibility of creating a form with questions, it allows researchers to automatically collect data and save them to an MS Excel file. We used in our research a non-random process approach to collect our data, but a convenient sample. It was not possible to use a random sample, because we did not have the list of all students. Questionnaires were sent to and posted on Facebook pages of Polish technical universities. In the research, a quantitative data collection method was used. The next stage included the statistical analysis of the collected data. In our data analysis we used the following quantitative technics: standard deviation analysis, histograms analysis, and Spearman’s rank correlation.

In the below text and tables, correlations statistically significant at the level of statistical significance α = 0.05 are shown in bold and green.

According to the calculator of the minimum research sample, for an unknown population size and the assumed statistical significance α = 0.05, the sample is 386 students [ 102 , 103 , 104 , 105 ]. The number of questionnaires obtained meets the condition of the minimum research sample. A five-point Likert scale was used for all questions in the survey.

The first part of the research referred to the advantages of using e-learning in higher education.

In this case, the following variables were used:

• • A1—Saving time;
• • A2—Lack of travel necessity;
• • A3—Possibility of learning from own home country/city;
• • A4—Lower costs;
• • A5—Individualization of the learning process;
• • A6—Easy access to materials;
• • A7—Good contact with the teacher;
• • A8—Higher availability of academic teachers;
• • A9—Ease of student progress tracking;
• • A10—Less mental and physical stress;
• • A11—Possibility of interaction (discussion on the forum, sending reactions);
• • A12—Convenience;
• • A13—Limiting the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

The second part of the questionnaire contained variables concerning the disadvantages occurring in the case of using e-learning in the university. The following disadvantages were taken into account in the research:

• • D1—Lack of direct contact with the teacher;
• • D2—Lack of direct contact with colleagues;
• • D3—Necessity to purchase e-learning equipment (computer/laptop/smartphone/headphones/microphone etc.);
• • D4—Low quality of e-learning materials;
• • D5—Difficulties with motivation to learn;
• • D6—Discomfort resulting from the use of information technology;
• • D7—Poor preparation of academic teachers for e-learning;
• • D8—Difficulties with teaching practical subjects;
• • D9—Difficulties in accessing traditional academic resources (e.g., libraries, reading rooms);
• • D10—Lack of possibility of using other academic activities (e.g., science clubs, sports sections);
• • D11—Difficulties with collaborating with colleagues;
• • D12—Cyber-threats;
• • D13—Risk of being recorded/photographed/“screenshot” etc.;
• • D14—Lack of possibility to verify student’s knowledge/skills reliably (e.g., due to the ease of cheating during tests via the Internet);
• • D15—Lack of/decreased privacy;
• • D16—Technical problems on the part of the lecturer;
• • D17—Technical problems on the part of the participants;
• • D18—Too much time spent in front of a computer/telephone or other mobile device
• • D19—Increase in electricity costs;
• • D20—Excessive use of own equipment;
• • D21—Difficult conditions to use e-learning in the place of residence.

During studying the variables influencing the advantages and disadvantages of e-learning at university, the following variables were taken into account in the survey:

• • Students’ evaluation of acquiring content in traditional education [ 1 ];
• • Students’ evaluation of acquiring content in e-learning;
• • The student’s familiarity with information technology;
• • Having the proper resources by students to participate in e-learning activities;
• • Innovative e-learning solutions used by the university.

The STATISCICA-13.3 software was used to analyze the collected data.

In the first stage of the research, the advantages of using innovative e-learning at universities were studied. Table 1 presents the results of the analysis for all variables. They included values of the averages, medians, and standard deviations.

The advantages of innovative e-learning in higher education.

Source: Authors.

As important advantages the students evaluated the following ones (rated over 4.0 out of 5.0, as already stated):

• • Lack of travel necessity—4.82;
• • Possibility of learning from own home country/city—4.62;
• • Saving time—4.54;
• • Lower costs—4.45;
• • Convenience—4.44;
• • Limiting the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus—4.37;
• • Easy access to materials—4.14.

For all the variables mentioned above, the median value was 5—which is the highest possible level.

It is worth noting that the highest-rated advantages are mostly those related to the convenience of studying and savings—time and money (related to travel to the university). In Poland generally, a substantial portion of the students come from outside of university cities [ 106 , 107 ]. Also, in recent years, we can observe an increasing number of students outside Poland studying in Polish universities [ 108 , 109 ]. This situation can have an impact on problems connected with costs of traveling to and from university and the cost of living in university cities. The use of innovative e-learning significantly reduces the cost of studying and facilitates studying for people from smaller towns, for whom, in the case of traditional education, the costs of travel and accommodation in a large city can be a great obstacle to studying. Ease of access to materials, despite the fact that it is also important, is a factor of less importance compared to the aspects related to saving time and money.

Another very important factor was limiting the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. It is interesting that, although innovative e-learning was introduced in Polish universities due to the pandemic, limiting the spread of the virus was rated only in the sixth place among the examined advantages. It proves that even though the pandemic initiated the widespread use of e-learning at universities, its use made students pay attention to other advantages of this type of learning. The results may suggest that e-learning could also be used after the end of the pandemic. Perhaps it will not be the basic form of teaching for all students, but its advantages may make it an alternative to traditional classes in some fields of study. Some earlier studies after the time of the pandemic pointed out the advantages of e-learning over traditional learning from the point of view of learners’ satisfaction. For example R. Tawafak [ 110 ], Alghazo [ 111 ], Titthasiri [ 112 ] or Hurlbut [ 113 ] wrote about it.

The rest of the studied advantages were rated below 4.0. In particular, it is worth noting that the lowest-rated advantage was good contact with the teacher (3.06). This suggests that e-learning does not improve contact with teachers and, thus, traditional learning works better.

We have analyzed histograms for the two highest rated advantages, which are lack of travel necessity and the possibility of learning from own home country/city. They are characterized by asymmetry—skewed—towards upper values in the scale. Most of the surveyed students (556) considered the lack of necessary travel to be a very important advantage of e-learning. Among the respondents, only six people decided that this advantage was not significant (1 or 2 points on the five-point Likert scale). In the case of the possibility of learning from their own home country or city, 493 people assessed this issue as very important (5 points), while 22 people considered it as unimportant (1 or 2 points).

Table 2 presents the results of research on the studied disadvantages of using e-learning. The average, median, and standard deviation values are given for each disadvantage. The research shows that the students did not consider any of the studied disadvantages of e-learning to be very significant;the average never exceeded 4.0, and the median never reached a value of 5.0. It should be noted that significant disadvantages are those whose average value exceeds 3.0, and whose median is 4.0. In this category, there are the following disadvantages: lack of direct contact with colleagues (rate 3.71), difficulties with teaching practical subjects (3.60), lack of direct contact with the teacher (3.41); too much time spent in front of a computer/telephone or other mobile device (rating 3.31).

The disadvantages of innovative e-learning in higher education.

The data analysis shows that the most important drawbacks of e-learning are connected with the reduction of social contacts; first of all, it concerns contacts between students, but also contacts between the student and the lecturer. Human beings are naturally social beings, and the lack of interpersonal contacts or limiting them to the Internet is not a natural and healthy matter. Many studies have shown the problematic effects of e-learning on social contacts between students and students and teachers. For example, the problem was analyzed by H. Baber [ 114 ], Di Pietro at al. [ 115 ], and Al Rawashdeh et al. [ 116 ]. A long-term reduction of direct social contact is a very important barrier [ 117 , 118 ]. Overcoming this issue largely determines the effectiveness of using e-learning in teaching at the level of higher education.

It should also be noted that not all fields of study are suitable for e-learning in the same way. The respondents indicated that an especially significant problem is the difficulty in teaching practical subjects. While there are no major difficulties in teaching theoretical subjects with the use of e-learning, efficient remote education is hard to realize in the case of practical skills and subjects. Research results suggest that practical courses/subjects should be taught in a traditional way after the end of the COVID-19 pandemic, while e-learning can be used to teach theoretical subjects. This approach can permit universities and students to use the advantages of e-learning, i.e., reducing the costs and time of traveling, as well as offer the study of efficiently practical skills, while at the same time not exposing students to social isolation.

The obtained results support the E1 expectation, which was formulated as follows: the most important advantages of innovative e-learning refer to the reduction in travel time and study expenses.

Subsequently, the disadvantage of e-learning may also be the difficulties with motivation to learn (the average value of 3.04, and the median value of 3.0), and the presence of technical problems on the part of students (the average value 3.14, at the median value of 3.0).

Research has shown that students do not feel discomfort resulting from the use of new technologies (2.08). In addition, the surveyed students did not consider the threats related to cybersecurity (rating 3.25) and the decrease in the level of privacy (rating 2.14) to be significant.

Table 3 contains an analysis of the relationship between the advantages and disadvantages of e-learning perceived by the surveyed students. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was used to analyze the relationship between the variables. The respective values of the coefficients are presented in Table 3 .

Spearman’s rank correlation between variables concerning the advantages and disadvantages of e-learning in universities.

When analyzing Table 3 , negative correlation coefficients between assessments of advantages and disadvantages by the studied students are observed in most cases. Students who are not satisfied with e-learning evaluate the disadvantages higher and the advantages lower. It is worth noting that the average value of advantages is higher than the average value of disadvantages. It shows that the university students who participated in the survey believe that the advantages of e-learning outweigh its disadvantages.

The analysis of cases for which the correlations have the highest values leads to interesting conclusions—they are statistically significant and exceed 0.4. This kind of situation can be observed for the D5 variable—difficulties with motivation to learn. This variable is negatively correlated at the level below −0.4 with the following variables: A7 (good contact with the teacher), A8 (high availability of academic teachers), A10 (less mental and physical stress), and A11 (possibility of interaction). The conducted research shows that to avoid problems with motivation in e-learning, students should be provided with good-quality contacts with academic teachers, including easy access to them via electronic means and the possibility of interaction with both teachers, and other students. This reduces stress and motivation problems.

Variable D11—difficulties with collaborating with colleagues—is also negatively correlated at a level below −0.4 with several studied advantages. They include the following: A7 (good contact with the teacher), A8 (higher availability of academic teachers), A9 (ease of student progress tracking), A10 (less mental and physical stress), and A11 (possibility of interaction). In this case, a similar phenomenon as for the discussed variable D5 can be observed: good contacts and the possibility of interaction with the teacher and students “protect” against problems related to the difficulties of cooperation with colleagues from the group.

Similar results were obtained for the D1 variable—lack of direct contact with the teacher; D2—lack of direct contact with colleagues; D8—difficulties with teaching practical subjects; and D14—lack of possibility to verify student’s knowledge/skills reliably (e.g., due to the ease of cheating during tests via the Internet).

Based on the conducted research, it can be claimed that good contact with academic teachers has a significant impact on reducing the occurrence of e-learning disadvantages. The teachers must be properly prepared to give e-learning classes. In particular, such classes must be easily accessible and enable students to quickly and separately contact their teacher and classmates. Good contact with teachers, as well as their high communication skills with the use of remote tools, can significantly reduce the occurrence of many disadvantages of e-learning. The obtained results support the expectation E2, which was formulated as follows: good contact with teachers and their ability to communicate on the use of remote tools are important variables positively influencing e-learning.

In the next stage of the research, an analysis of the Spearman correlation between the advantages and disadvantages of e-learning and the assessment of the ease of acquiring content during traditional classes and e-learning classes by students were performed. Accordingly, Table 4 presents Sperman’s correlations between the advantages of using e-learning and the ease of acquiring content by students in traditional learning and e-learning, and Table 5 shows the results of correlations between the disadvantages of using e-learning and the ease of acquiring content by students in traditional learning and e-learning.

Sperman’s rank correlations between the advantages of using innovative e-learning and the ease of acquiring content by students in traditional learning and e-learning.

Sperman’s rank correlations between the disadvantages of using innovative e-learning and the ease of acquiring content by students in traditional learning and e-learning.

All calculated correlation coefficients are statistically significant at the level of statistical significance α = 0.05. Research shows that all the advantages of e-learning are positively correlated with the student’s assessment of the ease of acquiring content in e-learning by students, and negatively correlated with the student’s assessment of the ease of acquiring content in traditional education. The obtained research results support the expectation E3 formulated as follows: the easier the student assimilates e-learning content, the higher the student evaluates the advantages of e-learning.

The opposite situation occurs for the disadvantages of e-learning. They are positively correlated with the ease of acquiring the content in traditional learning, and negatively correlated with the ease of acquiring the content in e-learning. On the basis of the results, we can say that the worse the student assimilates e-learning content, the higher the student evaluates the disadvantages of e-learning.

When analyzing the data on the advantages of e-learning, it can be observed that the highest level of correlation (above 0.5) between the studied advantages and the student’s perception of the ease of acquiring e-learning content occurs for the following variables: good contact with the teacher (correlation coefficient at a level of 0.56); possibility of interaction (0.52); higher availability of academic teachers (0.52), and less mental and physical stress (0.51). Again, the importance of the preparation of academic teachers for interpersonal communication with the use of remote tools is observed. The results support the expectation E2—good contact with teachers and their ability to communicate on the use of remote tools are important variables positively influencing e-learning.

In the case of the relationship between the disadvantages of using e-learning in universities and the ease of acquiring traditional and e-content, it can be observed that the highest negative correlation coefficient (−0.64) occurs between the ease of acquiring e-learning content and difficulties in motivation to learn. There are many international research efforts about the advantages and disadvantages of using e-learning in high education. For example, the topic is described V. Arkorful and N. Abaidoo [ 2 ], M. Curelary et al. [ 119 ] and A. Alsoud and A. Harasis [ 120 ]. People who perceive e-learning content as difficult to absorb have low motivation to learn remotely. The problem of importance of motivation in effectiveness of e-learning was analyzed by N. Elayan [ 121 ], M. El-Seoud et al. [ 122 ] and M. Ja’ashan [ 123 ]. The perceived difficulties of the content discourage them from this type of learning and make them not motivated enough. The problems connected with the impact of difficulty of content on e-learning was also analyzed by G. Bora [ 124 ] and L. Li and H. Zhang [ 125 ]. A similar relationship occurs in the case of cooperation with colleagues within groups. The problems connected with the impact of e-learning on collaboration between students was analyzed by Hurajowa et al. [ 126 ].

The last stage of the research considers the relationship between the advantages and disadvantages of e-learning, and variables such as the student’s knowledge of information technology, the student’s possession of resources necessary for e-learning, and the level of innovation of e-learning solutions used by university at which the given student studies.

The Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was used for the analysis. Table 6 shows the results for the advantages, and Table 7 the disadvantages.

Sperman’s rank correlations between the advantages of using e-learning and the student’s knowledge of information technology, the student’s possession of resources necessary for e-learning, and the innovation of e-learning solutions used by university at which the given student studies.

Sperman’s rank correlations between the disadvantages of using e-learning and student’s knowledge of information technology, student’s possession of resources necessary for e-learning, and innovation of e-learning solutions used by university in which the given student studies.

In the case of the advantages of e-learning, the following relationships were observed in the study:

• • All studied advantages are positively correlated with students’ knowledge of information technology;
• • All studied advantages are positively correlated with the student’s possession of resources necessary for e-learning,
• • All studied advantages are positively correlated with innovation of e-learning solutions used by university in which the given student studies.

The results confirm expectations E4, E5, and E6. The mentioned expectations were formulated as follows: E4—the better the student knows information technology, the higher the student evaluates the advantages of e-learning, E5—the better resources to participate in e-learning activities the student has, the higher the student evaluates the advantages of e-learning, 6—the more often innovative e-learning solutions are used in a given university, the better the student assesses the advantages of e-learning.

In the case of e-learning disadvantages, all correlation coefficients in Table 7 are statistically significant. The results for which statistical significance does not occur are marked with an asterisk.

The following relationships were observed in the research:

• • The studied disadvantages (except for two) are negatively correlated with the student’s knowledge of information technology;
• • All studied disadvantages are negatively correlated with the student’s possession of resources necessary for e-learning;
• • The studied disadvantages (except for one) are negatively correlated with the innovation of e-learning solutions used by university in which the given student studies.

The results of the research permit the conclusion that Polish university students’ knowledge of information technology and possession of resources necessary for e-learning are variables that positively affect the implementation of the e-learning process at a university. Students in Polish universities with the mentioned knowledge and resources assess the advantages of e-learning at a higher level and its disadvantages at a lower level. The efficiency of e-learning in Polish Universities is, to a large extent, conditioned by possession of the proper equipment which is sufficient for the comfortable e-learning and the level of knowledge and skills that allows for trouble-free operation during e-learning.

Another factor that positively influences the evaluation of e-learning by students in Polish universities is the use of innovative e-learning solutions at a given university. When such solutions are used at a given Polish university, students perceive all advantages of e-learning higher and evaluate most of its disadvantages lower.

5. Discussion and Conclusions

Many papers refer to advantages and disadvantages of innovative e-learning, but usually they are theoretical, descriptive, debatable, or review-based [ 2 , 4 , 5 , 9 ]—this refers also to the papers from the last two years, for example: [ 53 , 54 , 55 ]. In our research, the advantages and disadvantages were evaluated with a questionnaire. The students, as evaluators, were able to show their points of view on the advantages and disadvantages of e-learning. This research has been useful and justified to conduct since it provides measurable and quantitative data. A comparison of our research with the practical research of other authors is presented below.

In our research, the importance of advantages of innovative e-learning was rated higher than the importance of disadvantages. In the literature, there are also some research projects, in which the advantages are placed on the first place. Kaliyaperumal and Raman [ 49 ] investigated the satisfaction and sense of comfort with e-learning of nursing students in a Coimbatore college. The sample was 382 students. The students were highly satisfied with various aspects of the lecture, such as the teacher’s motivation, the question session at the end of the lecture, and the virtual film about the procedure, according to the results. Students were at ease attending e-learning classes since they are used to using a computer device, according to the findings. At this point, another research limitation can be identified. Our study referred to e-learning in general and was not focused on the given subject of study. Concentrating on the specific subjects, like mathematics, management etc. may bring different results. Other authors—Naveed et al. [ 50 ]—emphasize the advantages of e-learning, such as flexibility, no need to travel to school, and low costs. In another research study [ 51 ], the following positive aspects of online education were identified among teachers: the ease of teaching online, the flexibility of the work schedule, the adaptability to broad learning styles, the variety of tools available at hand, and the ease in monitoring and documenting teaching activities. The students and parents surveyed identified flexibility in work time, the comfort of working from home, as well as the variety of sources of documentation as the main advantages of the e-learning system. Gherheș et al. [ 52 ] also identified the advantages and disadvantages of e-learning. The main three advantages of e-learning, as pointed out by the respondents, were time efficiency, convenience, and accessibility. On the other hand, the respondents believed that lack of interaction was the main drawback of e-learning, supported by those who stated that they missed interacting with their peers. The rest of the important disadvantages were the technical problems encountered during the Internet connection, and lack of practical applications, which could mean a huge problem for students undertaking technical studies.

Our research has shown that in the case of Polish universities, the most important drawback of e-learning in the universities is the reduction of social contacts. This concerns contacts between students in the first place, but also includes contacts between the student and the lecturer. Rutkowska et al. [ 58 ] share the same opinion in their research. Isolation from peers and distance learning have significantly limited interpersonal contacts, which might have affected the mental well-being of students. The aim of their study was to investigate the prevalence of depressive symptoms and the level of perceived stress during e-learning among Slovak students and to identify the variables that have the most significant impact on mental health among students. The study included 3051 participants with a mean age of 22.37 years. Almost all study participants were characterized by an increased stress level and 47% of them were depressed. Furthermore, isolation affected women more, especially in terms of social life and economics. Other research has shown similar results [ 51 ]. According to them, students’ main dissatisfaction is the lack of student/teacher interactions, the lack of socialization with colleagues, and the lower level of quality of teaching.

Ibraheem et al. [ 59 ] in their paper described the results of a study using a method similar to the one that we used in our research. The research sample consisted of 199 male and female students from the College of Education for Human Sciences and College of Education for Pure Sciences, University of Basra, for the academic year 2020–2021. The results showed the following: the research sample does not suffer from social isolation; there are no statistically significant differences in social isolation according to the gender variable; there are statistically significant differences in social isolation according to the ‘class’ variable; there are no statistically significant differences in social isolation according to the field or specialization variable. To the contrary, Parte and Herrador-Alcaide [ 60 ] conducted isolation research during the COVID-19 pandemic among teachers. It was concluded that the isolation perception of tutors was not high, while the sense of belonging among the teaching community was high.

Article [ 57 ] summarizes the interviews of 15 respondents from Lithuanian higher education institutions and how their informants met changes, opportunities, and identified quality variables addressed to the successful e-learning during a pandemic period. Based on the results of this study, the advantages and disadvantages of e-learning can be identified. The research differs from ours because we utilized questionnaires and they employed interviews as a research method. Using only a questionnaire with closed questions can be assumed to be a research limitation. Extending the survey with, for example, interviews would further increase the quality of the research. The interviews allowed authors the collection of more detailed information and more subjective opinions from specific academics. However, the research was limited as it was carried out on only 15 people, while our research allowed more than 600 respondents to be examined. According to their results, e-learning has been a great opportunity and can bring many advantages. They emphasized flexible schedules and communication, time and cost savings, greater opportunity for post-graduate study, and better attendance at classes. It is worth noting that the authors found that theoretical lectures can be conducted at a distance, but that the laboratories and exercises should be offline. The interviewers claimed that in active classes there are things that cannot be changed due to the use of e-technology. In our research, the respondents did not consider the disadvantage of “difficulties with teaching practical subjects” to be very significant (average value 3.6, median value 4 out of 5). The reason for this difference in both studies is the respondents: in our research they were students, and in the authors’ research they were teachers. It means that teachers see more obstacles in learning practical subjects, whereas students find it easy to prepare and take on. It is because the perspectives of teaching and learning are different. Moreover, the authors also noticed that it is not possible to provide absolutely everything remotely because social skills will be lost. E-learning limits body language as well. For teachers, it is difficult to assess what they actually see on the other side of the screen. To the contrary, Bylieva et al. [ 46 ] concluded that an important parameter that influences the behavior of students and their educational progress in general is precisely the focus on practice. Thus, the predominance of the online component in blended learning is appropriate for practical courses. Within the theoretical and general education courses, the predominance of face-to-face learning can positively affect the educational process and results of learning. In this research, the authors have applied Moodle data mining from learning portfolios of 1500 students (N = 1500). Comparative analysis of the courses under review showed significant differences in the behavior of the same students. For the theoretical course, students spent less time than for the practice-oriented one. The progress of the students in the form of points and the demand for non-binding elements of the course differed significantly in favor of the practical course.

The issue of cheating in e-learning is interesting from the research point of view. The disadvantage of “lack of possibility to verify student’s knowledge/skills reliably (e.g., due to the ease of cheating during tests via the Internet)” was rated low (average value 2.72, median value 3) by the students. After conducting a literature review, it appeared that there are many papers on e-learning’s quality which refer to the e-cheating problem. The authors of other papers usually find e-cheating very easy and common. The authors of [ 2 ] claim that since tests for assessments in e-learning are possibly done with the use of a proxy, it is be difficult, if not impossible, to control or regulate bad activities like cheating. According to Jones et al. [ 61 ] cheating in e-learning is a major disadvantage and has a high risk of occurrence. The existence of a wealth of information on a wide range of topics helps, and at the same time, tempts. Connors [ 62 ] notices that academics who once praised the Internet for giving students more access to information are now worried it is providing students with easy access to pre-written essays. Using the Internet to cheat during online tests also poses the threat of collecting incorrect and unreliable information written by random people [ 63 ]. Nowadays, e-cheating is a subject of research; for example, Shoaib and Zahran [ 64 ] have concluded that academic misconduct was directly influenced by a rapid transition to e-learning, social culture, and subjective norms, all of which contributed to shifts in ethical perceptions, leading to increased reports of cheating. The study was carried out with ten graduates of the Saudi Arabian English as a Foreign Language program in a higher education institution through in-depth interviews through qualitative interpretative phenomenological analysis. Another research [ 65 ], in which 214 participants from different institutes and fields of study from Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University took part, revealed that students do not notice any serious forms of deception and they evaluate the motives for cheating quite neutrally, but at the same time demonstrate their propensity and interest in the possibility of cheating. On the other hand, solutions are also sought to the apparent problems of online cheating. Some studies find ways to prevent cheating [ 66 , 67 ], and some work on smart cheating detection [ 68 , 69 ].

Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, universities around the world were forced to switch to e-learning. Innovative e-learning was a great opportunity to continue learning despite the limitations and restrictions related to the occurrence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. In this paper, a study of the identification and evaluation of advantages and disadvantages of e-learning has been presented. The students considered as the most important the following advantages (average value rated over 4.0): lack of travel necessity (4.82), possibility of learning from own home country/city (4.62), saving time—4.54, lower costs (4.45), convenience (4.44), limiting the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus (4.37), easy access to materials (4.14). For all the variables mentioned above, the median value was 5—which is the highest possible level. As the most significant disadvantages, in turn, the students rated lack of direct contact with colleagues (3.71), difficulties with teaching practical subjects (3.60), lack of direct contact with the teacher (3.41), too much time spent in front of a computer/telephone or other mobile device (3.31). For the mentioned variables, the average value exceeded 3.0, and the median was 4.0. It is worth noting that the advantages of e-learning were evaluated as being more important than its disadvantages. It means that, according to the surveyed students, the positive sides of e-learning are much more important than its negatives. The results allow one to draw a conclusion of an overall positive assessment of e-learning used during the COVID-19 pandemic in Poland. The results confirmed that e-learning could also be used after the end of the pandemic. Its advantages may make it an alternative to traditional classes in some fields of study. It is worth noting that although it is not necessary for health safety reasons, some e-learning tools, for example the remote education platform, are used at our university all the time. Also, we should know that e-learning is especially effective when we use a mixed, open innovation approach using both internal and external knowledge.

Other important conclusions from the research include the following:

• • Innovative e-learning significantly reduces the cost of studying and facilitates studying for people from smaller towns, for whom the costs of travel and accommodation in a large city can be a great obstacle to studying in the case of traditional education;
• • Students satisfied with innovative e-learning assess the advantages highly and the disadvantages lower; on the contrary, students who are not satisfied with e-learning evaluate the disadvantages higher and the advantages lower;
• • Limiting the spread of the virus was rated only in the sixth place among the examined advantages. It proves that even though the pandemic initiated the widespread use of e-learning at universities, its use made students pay attention to other advantages of this type of learning;
• • Good contact with academic teachers has a significant impact on reducing the occurrence of e-learning disadvantages; the teachers must be properly prepared to give e-learning classes; classes must be easily accessible and enable students to quickly and separately contact the teacher and classmates;
• • Good contact with teachers as well as their high communication skills with the use of remote tools can significantly reduce the occurrence of many disadvantages of e-learning;
• • All the advantages of e-learning are positively correlated with the student’s assessment of the ease of acquiring content in e-learning by students, and negatively correlated with the student’s assessment of the ease of acquiring content in traditional education; the easier the student assimilates e-learning content, the higher the student evaluates the advantages of e-learning;
• • The disadvantages are positively correlated with the ease of acquiring the content in traditional learning, and negatively correlated with the ease of acquiring the content in e-learning; the worse the student assimilates e-learning content, the higher the student evaluates the disadvantages of e-learning;
• • Students who perceive e-learning content as difficult to absorb have low motivation to learn remotely; the perceived difficulties of the content discourage them from this type of learning and make them not motivated enough;
• • The better the student knows information technology, the higher the student evaluates the advantages of e-learning;
• • The better resources to participate in e-learning activities the student has, the higher the student evaluates the advantages of e-learning;
• • The more often innovative e-learning solutions are used in a given university, the better the student assesses the advantages of e-learning.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, K.S. and R.W.; literature review, K.S. and R.W.; methodology, K.S. and R.W.; validation, K.S. and R.W.; formal analysis, R.W.; investigation, K.S. and R.W.; writing—original draft preparation, K.S.; writing—review and editing, K.S.; funding acquisition, K.S. and R.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

According to our University Ethical Statement, following, the following shall be regarded as research requiring a favorable opinion from the Ethic Commission in the case of human research (based on document in polish: https://prawo.polsl.pl/Lists/Monitor/Attachments/7291/M.2021.501.Z.107.pdf ): research in which persons with limited capacity to give informed or research on persons whose capacity to give informed or free consent to participate in research and who have a limited ability to refuse research before or during their implementation, in particular: children and adolescents under 12 years of age, persons with intellectual disabilities persons whose consent to participate in the research may not be fully voluntary prisoners, soldiers, police officers, employees of companies (when the survey is conducted at their workplace), persons who agree to participate in the research on the basis of false information about the purpose and course of the research (masking instruction, i.e., deception) or do not know at all that they are subjects (in so-called natural experiments); research in which persons particularly susceptible to psychological trauma and mental health disorders are to participate mental health, in particular: mentally ill persons, victims of disasters, war trauma, etc., patients receiving treatment for psychotic disorders, family members of terminally or chronically ill patients; research involving active interference with human behavior aimed at changing it research involving active intervention in human behavior aimed at changing that behavior without direct intervention in the functioning of the brain, e.g., cognitive training, psychotherapy psychocorrection, etc. (this also applies if the intended intervention is intended to benefit (this also applies when the intended intervention is to benefit the subject (e.g., to improve his/her memory); research concerning controversial issues (e.g., abortion, in vitro fertilization, death penalty) or requiring particular delicacy and caution (e.g., concerning religious beliefs or attitudes towards minority groups) minority groups); research that is prolonged, tiring, physically or mentally exhausting. Our research is not done on people meeting the mentioned condition. Any of the researched people: any of them had limited capacity to be informed, any of them had been susceptible to psychological trauma and mental health disorders, the research did not concern the mentioned-above controversial issues, the research was not prolonged, tiring, physically or mentally exhausting.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Conflicts of interest.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Remote Learning During COVID-19: Lessons from Today, Principles for Tomorrow

"Remote Learning During the Global School Lockdown: Multi-Country Lessons” and “Remote Learning During COVID-19: Lessons from Today, Principles for Tomorrow"

WHY A TWIN REPORT ON THE IMPACT OF COVID IN EDUCATION?

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted education in over 150 countries and affected 1.6 billion students. In response, many countries implemented some form of remote learning. The education response during the early phase of COVID-19 focused on implementing remote learning modalities as an emergency response. These were intended to reach all students but were not always successful. As the pandemic has evolved, so too have education responses. Schools are now partially or fully open in many jurisdictions.

A complete understanding of the short-, medium- and long-term implications of this crisis is still forming. The twin reports analyze how this crisis has amplified inequalities and also document a unique opportunity to reimagine the traditional model of school-based learning.

The reports were developed at different times during the pandemic and are complementary:

The first one follows a qualitative research approach to document the opinions of education experts regarding the effectiveness of remote and remedial learning programs implemented across 17 countries. DOWNLOAD THE FULL REPORT

WHAT ARE THE LESSONS LEARNED OF THE TWIN REPORTS?

• Availability of technology is a necessary but not sufficient condition for effective remote learning: EdTech has been key to keep learning despite the school lockdown, opening new opportunities for delivering education at a scale. However, the impact of technology on education remains a challenge.
• Teachers are more critical than ever: Regardless of the learning modality and available technology, teachers play a critical role. Regular and effective pre-service and on-going teacher professional development is key. Support to develop digital and pedagogical tools to teach effectively both in remote and in-person settings.
• Education is an intense human interaction endeavor: For remote learning to be successful it needs to allow for meaningful two-way interaction between students and their teachers; such interactions can be enabled by using the most appropriate technology for the local context.
• Parents as key partners of teachers: Parent’s involvement has played an equalizing role mitigating some of the limitations of remote learning. As countries transition to a more consistently blended learning model, it is necessary to prioritize strategies that provide guidance to parents and equip them with the tools required to help them support students.
• Leverage on a dynamic ecosystem of collaboration: Ministries of Education need to work in close coordination with other entities working in education (multi-lateral, public, private, academic) to effectively orchestrate different players and to secure the quality of the overall learning experience.
• FULL REPORT
• Interactive document
• Understanding the Effectiveness of Remote and Remedial Learning Programs: Two New Reports
• Understanding the Perceived Effectiveness of Remote Learning Solutions: Lessons from 18 Countries
• Five lessons from remote learning during COVID-19
• Launch of the Twin Reports on Remote Learning during COVID-19: Lessons for today, principles for tomorrow

This site uses cookies to optimize functionality and give you the best possible experience. If you continue to navigate this website beyond this page, cookies will be placed on your browser. To learn more about cookies, click here .

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed education forever. This is how 

With schools shut across the world, millions of children have had to adapt to new types of learning. Image:  REUTERS/Gonzalo Fuentes

.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo{-webkit-transition:all 0.15s ease-out;transition:all 0.15s ease-out;cursor:pointer;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;outline:none;color:inherit;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:hover,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-hover]{-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:focus,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-focus]{box-shadow:0 0 0 3px rgba(168,203,251,0.5);} Cathy Li

Farah lalani.

.chakra .wef-9dduvl{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-9dduvl{font-size:1.125rem;}} Explore and monitor how .chakra .wef-15eoq1r{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;color:#F7DB5E;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-15eoq1r{font-size:1.125rem;}} Education, Gender and Work is affecting economies, industries and global issues

.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;color:#2846F8;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{font-size:1.125rem;}} Get involved with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale

Stay up to date:, education, gender and work.

• The COVID-19 has resulted in schools shut all across the world. Globally, over 1.2 billion children are out of the classroom.
• As a result, education has changed dramatically, with the distinctive rise of e-learning, whereby teaching is undertaken remotely and on digital platforms.
• Research suggests that online learning has been shown to increase retention of information, and take less time, meaning the changes coronavirus have caused might be here to stay.

While countries are at different points in their COVID-19 infection rates, worldwide there are currently more than 1.2 billion children in 186 countries affected by school closures due to the pandemic. In Denmark, children up to the age of 11 are returning to nurseries and schools after initially closing on 12 March , but in South Korea students are responding to roll calls from their teachers online .

With this sudden shift away from the classroom in many parts of the globe, some are wondering whether the adoption of online learning will continue to persist post-pandemic, and how such a shift would impact the worldwide education market.

Even before COVID-19, there was already high growth and adoption in education technology, with global edtech investments reaching US$18.66 billion in 2019 and the overall market for online education projected to reach $350 Billion by 2025 . Whether it is language apps , virtual tutoring , video conferencing tools, or online learning software , there has been a significant surge in usage since COVID-19.

How is the education sector responding to COVID-19?

In response to significant demand, many online learning platforms are offering free access to their services, including platforms like BYJU’S , a Bangalore-based educational technology and online tutoring firm founded in 2011, which is now the world’s most highly valued edtech company . Since announcing free live classes on its Think and Learn app, BYJU’s has seen a 200% increase in the number of new students using its product, according to Mrinal Mohit, the company's Chief Operating Officer.

Tencent classroom, meanwhile, has been used extensively since mid-February after the Chinese government instructed a quarter of a billion full-time students to resume their studies through online platforms. This resulted in the largest “online movement” in the history of education with approximately 730,000 , or 81% of K-12 students, attending classes via the Tencent K-12 Online School in Wuhan.

Have you read?

The future of jobs report 2023, how to follow the growth summit 2023.

Other companies are bolstering capabilities to provide a one-stop shop for teachers and students. For example, Lark, a Singapore-based collaboration suite initially developed by ByteDance as an internal tool to meet its own exponential growth, began offering teachers and students unlimited video conferencing time, auto-translation capabilities, real-time co-editing of project work, and smart calendar scheduling, amongst other features. To do so quickly and in a time of crisis, Lark ramped up its global server infrastructure and engineering capabilities to ensure reliable connectivity.

Alibaba’s distance learning solution, DingTalk, had to prepare for a similar influx: “To support large-scale remote work, the platform tapped Alibaba Cloud to deploy more than 100,000 new cloud servers in just two hours last month – setting a new record for rapid capacity expansion,” according to DingTalk CEO, Chen Hang.

Some school districts are forming unique partnerships, like the one between The Los Angeles Unified School District and PBS SoCal/KCET to offer local educational broadcasts, with separate channels focused on different ages, and a range of digital options. Media organizations such as the BBC are also powering virtual learning; Bitesize Daily , launched on 20 April, is offering 14 weeks of curriculum-based learning for kids across the UK with celebrities like Manchester City footballer Sergio Aguero teaching some of the content.

What does this mean for the future of learning?

While some believe that the unplanned and rapid move to online learning – with no training, insufficient bandwidth, and little preparation – will result in a poor user experience that is unconducive to sustained growth, others believe that a new hybrid model of education will emerge, with significant benefits. “I believe that the integration of information technology in education will be further accelerated and that online education will eventually become an integral component of school education,“ says Wang Tao, Vice President of Tencent Cloud and Vice President of Tencent Education.

There have already been successful transitions amongst many universities. For example, Zhejiang University managed to get more than 5,000 courses online just two weeks into the transition using “DingTalk ZJU”. The Imperial College London started offering a course on the science of coronavirus, which is now the most enrolled class launched in 2020 on Coursera .

Many are already touting the benefits: Dr Amjad, a Professor at The University of Jordan who has been using Lark to teach his students says, “It has changed the way of teaching. It enables me to reach out to my students more efficiently and effectively through chat groups, video meetings, voting and also document sharing, especially during this pandemic. My students also find it is easier to communicate on Lark. I will stick to Lark even after coronavirus, I believe traditional offline learning and e-learning can go hand by hand."

These 3 charts show the global growth in online learning

The challenges of online learning.

There are, however, challenges to overcome. Some students without reliable internet access and/or technology struggle to participate in digital learning; this gap is seen across countries and between income brackets within countries. For example, whilst 95% of students in Switzerland, Norway, and Austria have a computer to use for their schoolwork, only 34% in Indonesia do, according to OECD data .

In the US, there is a significant gap between those from privileged and disadvantaged backgrounds: whilst virtually all 15-year-olds from a privileged background said they had a computer to work on, nearly 25% of those from disadvantaged backgrounds did not. While some schools and governments have been providing digital equipment to students in need, such as in New South Wales , Australia, many are still concerned that the pandemic will widenthe digital divide .

Is learning online as effective?

For those who do have access to the right technology, there is evidence that learning online can be more effective in a number of ways. Some research shows that on average, students retain 25-60% more material when learning online compared to only 8-10% in a classroom. This is mostly due to the students being able to learn faster online; e-learning requires 40-60% less time to learn than in a traditional classroom setting because students can learn at their own pace, going back and re-reading, skipping, or accelerating through concepts as they choose.

Nevertheless, the effectiveness of online learning varies amongst age groups. The general consensus on children, especially younger ones, is that a structured environment is required , because kids are more easily distracted. To get the full benefit of online learning, there needs to be a concerted effort to provide this structure and go beyond replicating a physical class/lecture through video capabilities, instead, using a range of collaboration tools and engagement methods that promote “inclusion, personalization and intelligence”, according to Dowson Tong, Senior Executive Vice President of Tencent and President of its Cloud and Smart Industries Group.

Since studies have shown that children extensively use their senses to learn, making learning fun and effective through use of technology is crucial, according to BYJU's Mrinal Mohit. “Over a period, we have observed that clever integration of games has demonstrated higher engagement and increased motivation towards learning especially among younger students, making them truly fall in love with learning”, he says.

A changing education imperative

It is clear that this pandemic has utterly disrupted an education system that many assert was already losing its relevance . In his book, 21 Lessons for the 21st Century , scholar Yuval Noah Harari outlines how schools continue to focus on traditional academic skills and rote learning , rather than on skills such as critical thinking and adaptability, which will be more important for success in the future. Could the move to online learning be the catalyst to create a new, more effective method of educating students? While some worry that the hasty nature of the transition online may have hindered this goal, others plan to make e-learning part of their ‘new normal’ after experiencing the benefits first-hand.

The importance of disseminating knowledge is highlighted through COVID-19

Major world events are often an inflection point for rapid innovation – a clear example is the rise of e-commerce post-SARS . While we have yet to see whether this will apply to e-learning post-COVID-19, it is one of the few sectors where investment has not dried up . What has been made clear through this pandemic is the importance of disseminating knowledge across borders, companies, and all parts of society. If online learning technology can play a role here, it is incumbent upon all of us to explore its full potential.

Our education system is losing relevance. Here's how to unleash its potential

3 ways the coronavirus pandemic could reshape education, celebrities are helping the uk's schoolchildren learn during lockdown, don't miss any update on this topic.

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

Related topics:

The agenda .chakra .wef-n7bacu{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-weight:400;} weekly.

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

.chakra .wef-1dtnjt5{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;} More on Health and Healthcare Systems .chakra .wef-17xejub{-webkit-flex:1;-ms-flex:1;flex:1;justify-self:stretch;-webkit-align-self:stretch;-ms-flex-item-align:stretch;align-self:stretch;} .chakra .wef-nr1rr4{display:-webkit-inline-box;display:-webkit-inline-flex;display:-ms-inline-flexbox;display:inline-flex;white-space:normal;vertical-align:middle;text-transform:uppercase;font-size:0.75rem;border-radius:0.25rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;line-height:1.2;-webkit-letter-spacing:1.25px;-moz-letter-spacing:1.25px;-ms-letter-spacing:1.25px;letter-spacing:1.25px;background:none;padding:0px;color:#B3B3B3;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;box-decoration-break:clone;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;}@media screen and (min-width:37.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:0.875rem;}}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:1rem;}} See all

Antimicrobial resistance is a leading cause of global deaths. Now is the time to act

Dame Sally Davies, Hemant Ahlawat and Shyam Bishen

May 16, 2024

Inequality is driving antimicrobial resistance. Here's how to curb it

Michael Anderson, Gunnar Ljungqvist and Victoria Saint

May 15, 2024

From our brains to our bowels – 5 ways the climate crisis is affecting our health

Charlotte Edmond

May 14, 2024

Health funders unite to support climate and disease research, plus other top health stories

Shyam Bishen

May 13, 2024

How midwife mentors are making it safer for women to give birth in remote, fragile areas

Anna Cecilia Frellsen

May 9, 2024

From Athens to Dhaka: how chief heat officers are battling the heat

Angeli Mehta

May 8, 2024

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 02 October 2020

Emergent transition from face-to-face to online learning in a South African University in the context of the Coronavirus pandemic

• Cedric B. Mpungose 1  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  7 , Article number:  113 ( 2020 ) Cite this article

128k Accesses

155 Citations

2 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Science, technology and society

South African universities have been forced to transit from face-to-face to online learning (e-learning) as a result of the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). However, various challenges hinder disadvantaged students from realising the full potential of e-learning. Therefore, this study’s main objective is to propose alternative pathways to overcome such challenges for students, to enable them to have access to effective e-learning. This study draws on a two-year postdoctoral qualitative research project conducted at a South African university to explore students’ experiences of the transition from face-to-face to e-learning. Twenty-six students completing a curriculum studies programme were purposively and conveniently sampled to generate data using e-reflective activity, Zoom group meetings and a WhatsApp one-on-one semi-structured interview. Findings articulate the digital divide as a hindrance to students realising the full potential of e-learning, yet lecturers still want students to submit assessment tasks and engage with course activities on the Moodle learning management system. With universities using face-to-face learning becoming vulnerable to the COVID-19 pandemic and other challenges which result in a shutdown of university sites, alternatives need to be sought to allow students, particularly disadvantaged students, to realise e-learning.

Similar content being viewed by others

Preparing undergraduates for the post-pandemic workplace: Teams of education and engineering students teach engineering virtually

How does the COVID-19 pandemic influence students’ academic activities? An explorative study in a public university in Bangladesh

Content validity of the Constructivist Learning in Higher Education Settings (CLHES) scale in the context of the flipped classroom in higher education

Introduction.

Since the beginning of higher education, from the time of colonisation to the era of decolonisation, almost all South African universities have been dependent on face-to-face learning (Cuban, 1986 ; Mgqwashu’, 2017 ). Jansen ( 2004 ) argues that face-to-face learning is believed be traditional and excludes students’ experiences, because it occurs in the presence of a lecturer depositing knowledge for students in a demarcated classroom, using traditional methods (lecturer-centred) and traditional resources like textbooks, chats, chalkboards and others. However, these demarcated physical classrooms are not accessible in the case of challenges ranging from student protests to pandemic outbreaks. Face-to-face learning provides real-time contact with resources and others, takes place within a specified contact time, and provides prompt feedback to students (Black and Wiliam, 2006 ; Waghid, 2018 ). That said, e-learning is education that takes place over the Internet is alternatively called online learning, and it is an umbrella term for any learning that takes place across distance and not in a face-to-face platform (Anderson, 2016 ; Mpungose, 2020a ). Furthermore, Choudhury and Pattnaik ( 2020 ) affirm that, e-learning definition evolves with the evolution of Web from Web 0 to 4.0. Thus, “the world was introduced to Internet-based learning with Web 0, which was a read-only site. Thereon, Web (2.0) and Web (3.0) allowed real-time interaction and connected intelligence, respectively. We now witness Web 4.0 where machine and the human brain can directly interact” (Choudhury and Pattnaik, 2020 , p. 2). The concepts of e-learning, distance education, online learning and web-based education are concepts that have been used in the literature. However, Rodrigues et al. ( 2019 , p. 88) affirm that both these concepts share the common feature that “they are a form of instruction that occurs between a learner and an instructor and are held at different times and/or places, using several forms of material”. As such, Arkorful and Abaidoo ( 2015 ) refer to e-learning as the use of educational technologies to enable access to learning and teaching material online. Thus, the importance of e-learning which takes place through the use of the Internet in 21st century university education is undeniable, particularly for the students of today as digital natives (Bennett et al., 2008 ; Prensky, 2001 ). Amory ( 2010 ) and Khoza ( 2019b ) state that e-learning is capable of making course content available online, because of the widespread use of modern technologies such as hardware resources (computers, laptops, mobile phones and others), and software resources (learning management system, software applications, social media sites and others). This suggests that students have freedom to access course information/content anytime and anywhere, irrespective of challenges such as the pandemic outbreak—provided they have access to hardware and software resources.

In complicating the above debate, some studies (Liu and Long, 2014 ; Nikoubakht and Kiamanesh, 2019 ) further argue that face-to-face learning is irreplaceable and is the cornerstone of every learning institution, even if the current discourse and technological revolution demand the use of e-learning. The latter studies believe that there is still a conundrum between face-to-face (person-to-person interaction in a live synchronous platform) and e-learning (self-paced learning in an asynchronous platform). As a solution to this conundrum, other scholars (Anderson, 2016 ; Bates, 2018 ; Graham, 2006 ) believe that blended learning which combines online and face-to-face learning is the way to go, so that students can use many ways of accessing course content based on their needs (strengths/limitations).

Nevertheless, there are compelling conditions that can make students choose online over face-to-face learning; this may include violent student protest, pandemic diseases like COVID-19 in the context of this study, and others. According the World Health Organization-WHO ( 2020 ), COVID-19 is a new strain of viruses discovered in 2019, which cause illnesses ranging from the common cold to more severe diseases that can lead to death. They are transmitted between animals and people. Common symptoms of infection include respiratory symptoms, fever, cough, and shortness of breath. As at 31 March 2020, statistics stay at 33 106 deaths globally and in Africa is currently 60 deaths. In other words, this pandemic poses a threat to the face-to-face learning context globally, including in South Africa.

On 11 March 2020 the WHO ( 2020 ) declared COVID-19 a pandemic, and everyone was advised to avoid close contact with anyone showing symptoms. Therefore, universities across the globe have to shut down. In the South African context the President called on all universities to shut down and find ways to offer lectures online as from 18 March 2020 as a precautionary measure (DHET, 2020 ). This call raised questions as to the feasibility of e-learning, particularly at the School of Education in one of the universities in the province of KwaZulu-Natal, because of the extent of inequalities in the South African context. While Mzangwa ( 2019 ) agrees with Bunting ( 2006 ) that since 1994 much has been done in higher education to redress the inequalities of the past through higher education institutions’ policy amendments through the National Plan for Higher Education (Ministry of Education, 2001 ). These amendments have not led to benefits for the majority of previously disadvantaged black South African students in terms of access to e-learning.

In addition, the digital divide—the gap between those who have and do not have access to computers and the Internet—seems to be a huge factor limiting the feasibility of e-learning in a South African context (Van Deursen and van Dijk, 2019 ; Warschauer, 2002 ). These latter studies further assert that issues such as socio-economic factors, race, social class, gender, age, geographical area and educational background determine the level of the digital divide in a university context. While access to the Internet and computers is high in developed European and American universities, African universities—particularly in the South African context—are still battling because of the intensity of the factors which led to the digital divide (Van Deursen and van Dijk, 2019 ). Research shows that various programmes and policies have been developed and implemented to remedy this challenge; hence, universities provide students with free laptops and Wi-Fi (wireless network commonly allows technological devices to interface with internet) access inside the university and residences (Rodrigues et al., 2019 ; Schofield, 2007 ). However, little or no research has been done in the South African context to intervene in addressing university students’ challenges (the digital divide) that hinder them from accessing e-learning from home. This study argues that e-learning while students are at home can never be realised in a South African university context unless the digital divide is addressed. In proposing alternative pathways for South African universities to deal with the digital divide, this study considers a connectivism learning framework.

Conceptualising learning in a digital age

The rapidly evolving technological landscape in the 21st century has meant that university lecturers “have been forced to adapt their teaching approaches without a clear roadmap for attending to students’ various needs” (Kop and Hill, 2008 , p. 2). As a result, connectivism is the promising initial lens through which to conceptualise learning in this digital age, because of its varying attributes from face-to-face to e-learning. Thus, Siemens and Downes ( 2009 ) see learning as the process of crossing boundaries by creating connections or relationships between human and non-human nodes through the setting of an interconnected network. Connectivist learning draws much from available Internet and technological resources to make an effective network that will maximise learning. As a result, connectivity seeks university lecturers to consider the possibilities of Internet access and other technological resources for effective learning, so that each individual student may gather and share information irrespective of challenges (the digital divide) faced (Bell, 2011 ; Kop and Hill, 2008 ). In other words, for effective e-learning to occur even if students are at home, access to the Internet and technological resources should be made available so that they may make connections amongst themselves and the lecturers, irrespective of hindrances faced.

Siemens (2005) further argues that in connectivism, students are not taken as a blank slate or passive recipients of information but are taken as active participants who can nurture, maintain, and traverse network connections to access, share and use information for learning. In order to ensure this, Siemens and Downes ( 2009 ) propose eight principles guiding connectivist learning, as depicted in Table 1 overleaf, which are according to this study are now conceptualised to form dichotomies between F2F learning and e-learning. These principles draw from basic learning frameworks (behaviourism, cognitivism, and constructivism) to incorporate both subject and social experiences for learning. Traditionally, learning is believed to be occurring when the lecturer provides a stimulus (teacher-centred activities) so that students can respond, but the rapid development and implementation of new technologies seeks learning to be individually and socially constructed by students (learner-centred activities) to maintain a diversity of ideas. This suggests that digital learning is more participatory and effective than traditional learning because it seeks lecturers to engage students in a dialogue for social construction of knowledge (Downes, 2010 ). Moreover, Siemens and Downes ( 2009 ) agree with Anderson ( 2016 ) that learning is about creating and connecting to a community (node) of learning within a network. This connection does not only take place within a learning institution, but can also be online so that students at home or in their residences can access learning. In other words, connectivism prioritises e-learning as the first and best option for students to access learning, if there are forceful or compelling conditions that hinder face-to-face learning.

Siemens and Downes ( 2009 ) further argue in principle that traditional resources such as books, chats, chalkboard and others form the core of learning, but the digital age needs them to be supplemented by modern resources like the Internet, computers, mobile phones and others for students to make connections and share information amongst themselves and others. In other words, modern resources enhance active student participation and the capacity to know more; thus the active student has the ability to use resources provided to seek out current information from primary and secondary resources, as compared to being a passive student (Downes, 2010 ). This suggests that in connectivist learning, it is not enough for a student to depend only on the prescribed readings, taught content, consultation with one lecturer and students in a particular subject/module. However, connectivists seek students to enjoy exploring the world in order to connect with other people outside the normal context, through the use of search engines, social media and other means, because learning is about not only knowledge consumption but construction (Anderson, 2016 ).

The manner in which students are assessed depends on the ability to see connections between subject fields, ideas, and concepts (Siemens and Downes, 2009 ). In other words, assessment must be made enjoyable to students because it is not done for the purpose of grading but for developmental purposes (Black and William, 2009 ). The content (objectives) taught during the official time in the lecture may change over time, based on new contributions in a subject; this requires students to be driven by a professional and social rationale in making decisions as to what to learn and how to make meaning out of it (Downes, 2010 ). Therefore, just lecture contact time is not enough for students, and it should be supplemented with students’ extra time so that learning outcomes can be achieved.

Furthermore, review of research done by Damşa et al. ( 2015 ) on quality in Norwegian Higher Education, outlines dichotomous aspect of F2F learning and e-learning. The study aimed at identified important contributors to enhance of quality learning in higher education, and to identify the knowledge gaps in the literature. It was found that, in as much as both platforms (F2F learning and e-learning) share the same aspect in communication, collaboration, and supervision and interaction. However, e-learning provides much of these aspect than F2F learning since it creates more intense atmosphere from synchronous to asynchronous teaching and learning aspect. This suggests that the development use of educational technology (videos, smart phones, learning management systems and social media sites) raises quality learning on e-learning as compared to F2F environment. Thus, e-learning advocates for student-centredness versus teacher-centeredness in teaching and learning of the content because “students learn together online, support mechanisms such as guiding questions generally influence the way students interact…” (Damşa et al., 2015 , p. 56).

Review of the literature: technology in and of learning in a digital age

While there are various definitions of educational technology, a narrow definition refers to educational technology as “the effective use of technological tools in teaching and learning” by bringing in students’ experiences (Govender’ and Khoza, 2017 , p. 67). These studies (Amory, 2010 ; Khoza, 2019b ) are pessimistic in tone, further pioneering the most narrow and concise definition of educational technology, that it is there because of technology in education (software and hardware resources in learning) and technology of education (pedagogical resources in learning). Thus, according to the context of this study, educational technology is all physical resources and online resources used in learning, and ideological resources behind the use of both physical resources and online resources.

Nocar et al. ( 2016 ) conducted a qualitative case study in China and the Czech Republic to outline the importance of physical resources. Findings outlined that the use of both traditional physical resources and modern physical resources for teaching display a fruitful result for students’ knowledge acquisition. Moreover, some scholars believe that traditional physical resources (traditional education), like stationary desks, books, chalkboard and others, enhance students’ task to memorise and recite content during learning, and its use still symbolises the principle of slavery (Cuban, 1986 ; Freire, 1972 ). However, the use of traditional physical resources promotes a teacher-centred method, which is the most direct and effective way for teaching students because it provides face-to-face interaction (Hoadley and Jansen, 2014 ). As such, Liu and Long ( 2014 ) further argue that traditional physical resources, sometimes referred to as ‘old technology’ (television, chats, radio, posters and others) is irreplaceable and the cornerstone of every learning institution, even if the current discourse demands the use of modern physical resources.

Furthermore, the importance and usage of modern physical resources (technological tools) is witnessed in every corner of each university. A study conducted by Keengwe, Onchwari, and Wachira ( 2008 ), to provide a literature review on the use of modern physical resources (computers, mobile phones and others) for teaching and learning university courses, affirmed this. The study outlined that modern physical resources provide opportunities to support students’ learning and need good and strategic planning for maximum integration into the curriculum. Consequently, in the past two decades universities have begun to integrate modern physical resources into the curriculum for effective learning (Khoza, 2019a ; Mpungose’, 2019a ). This suggests that students should be provided with relevant technological devices, which may include but are not limited to netbooks, iPads, webcams, laptops and desktop computers, mobile phones and others. These kinds of new technology have made life easier for students, because they would find notes and all course information stored electronically and easily accessible (Amory, 2010 ; Waghid, 2018 ). In other words, that the accessibility of modern physical resources give students options to use any available resources in order to access online resources.

van de Heyde and Siebrits ( 2019 ) revealed that online resources are software resources in education that help physical resources to communicate learning. This includes but is not limited to application software packages (Microsoft Office 365), Internet browsers (Firefox, Chrome), social media sites (Twitter, Facebook), and learning management systems (Moodle, Canvas) (Anderson, 2016 ; Bates, 2018 ). In the context of this study, the focus is more on learning management systems and social media sites to enhance e-learning. As such, the importance of e-learning is witnessed in study conducted Swinnerton et al. ( 2018 ) in unbundled University project exploring digitalisation and marketisation of higher education in both United Kingdom and South Africa. The study revealed that irrespective of existing inequalities, but the use of e-learning for teaching and learning university courses is significantly the effective way to ensure relationships between universities and private sector. In other words, if students does not have access to technological resources for e-learning they are less likely to be unemployed after receiving their qualification because of the lack of technological skills applicable in the workspace.

Cavus and Zabadi ( 2014 ) argue that in trying to move away from the traditional paper and pen environment (face-to-face), learning management systems (web-based learning environment to disseminate content) is one of the most highly adopted and used online environments in higher education institutions for e-learning. This includes open-source software learning management systems (free of charge, where the source code can be changed) such as Moodle, Open edX and Chamilo, and cloud-based learning management systems (with a start-up cost and source code that cannot be changed) such as Canvas, Sakai, dot Learn and others. Ajlan and Pontes ( 2012 ) outline that almost all learning management systems have common features, which include pedagogy, learner environment, instructor tools, course and curriculum design, administrator tools, and technical specifications. However, their efficiency can be different because of various factors such as being unclear to users, bandwidth requirements, take-up and maintenance cost, manuals, customisation and adaptation to the local environment (Anderson, 2016 ). However, this needs effective e-learning policies in place in order to address the needs of students and lecturers as according to the recent study conducted by Swartz et al. ( 2019 ) to explore the core business in contemporary South African universities.

In exploring first-year students’ use of social media sites at one South African university of technology, Basitere and Mapatagane ( 2018 ) confirmed that students become more interactive when they use platforms that they are familiar with, such as social media sites, compared to learning management systems imposed by the university. Social media sites are referred to as Internet-influenced Web 2.0 technologies that allow users to create social networks to share content based on personal experiences, education and society. Hence, social media sites users can be referred to as ‘prosumers’ because they produce (create) and consume (share) information (Clement, 2020 ; Ritzer and Jurgenson, 2010 ). Moreover, a recent review conducted by Manca ( 2020 ) on the integration of social media sites into learning, revealed that both Twitter and Facebook are the most used social media sites in higher education, compared to Instagram, WhatsApp, Pinterest, Snapchat and others. In addition, social media sites content is easily accessible because it is compatible with both computers and mobile devices, and this makes life easier for students (Clement, 2020 ; Dlamini and Nkambule, 2019 ; Manca, 2020 ).

With all of the above being said about the use both physical resources (traditional and modern) and online resources (learning management system and social media sites) for learning, but digital divide remains the major issue. As such,Van Deursen and van Dijk ( 2019 ) assert that the digital divide is one of the big limitations on the use of educational technology globally. These authors’ study further argues that the digital divide is a real phenomenon that is here to stay in developed countries, but is worse in developing ones—not only in terms of the first digital divide (access to Internet), but also in terms of the second digital divide (attitude, skills, type of use) and third digital divide (Internet outcomes/benefits). This suggests that even though universities can provide free access to Wi-Fi within their perimeters and students’ residences, including free laptops, there will be some students (residing in rental rooms or at home) who might not have access to the Internet. Similarly, some students would prefer to use other resources, based on their strengths or limitations. Hence, this paper argues for alternatives to be made available by lecturers or university management, so that all students can have the same access to e-learning irrespective of their geographical area, culture, race, socio-economic factors and others.

Selwyn ( 2004 ) further argue that the dichotomous aspect of digital divide clearly reveals the ones that either have access or do not have access to technological resources, and this influence the status of connectedness (either connected or not connected). The latter author assert that this situation is termed as ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’. Consequently, the latter author concludes that the digital divide is a critical issue in higher education landscape that is not just technological but it is also social, economic, cultural and political. This suggests that in mitigating digital divide, universities, communities, churches, political figures, businessman and others seek to collaborate and come up with both practical and theoretical solution in order to enhance effective e-learning in pre, during and post pandemic outbreak.

Research context and method

Study context.

LMS have been adopted by most South African universities to cope with the demands for accessible and more flexible online content dissemination (Amory, 2010 ; Mpungose, 2019b ). In transitioning from the paper (face-to-face) to the paperless (online) environment, the University of KwaZulu-Natal in South Africa adopted the Moodle LMS in 2010; it was made compulsory in 2016 for first-year students and fully implemented at the fourth-year level in 2019 (University Moodle Training Guide, 2017 ). Unavailability of a guiding online learning policy and lack of training for lecturers ignited challenges, which were evident in the use of learning management systems by students (Mpungose, 2019b ).

To this end, from 2019 to 2020 I conducted a postdoctoral research project on students’ experiences with the use of a learning management system in a School of Education. From the project, I extracted a case of 26 students’ experiences of the use of the LMS. A South African University at School of Education offers a broad range of degree programme courses across various fields of study. It prepares mostly disadvantaged black students, followed by other minorities (Indian, coloured (mixed race) and white students) for professional teaching careers in Education Studies and other disciplines. The School of Education mainly offers all lectures in face-to-face form, while the learning management system is used as an online resources depository (holding lecturers’ notes) for student access. The eruption of the COVID-19 pandemic forced the School of Education to move all lectures totally online. However, the majority of registered students in School of Education at South African universities are victims of the digital divide, and this hinders their access to e-learning (Bunting, 2006 ; Dlamini and Nkambule, 2019 ). Therefore, this study’s main objective is to propose alternative pathways to overcome hindrances to students’ access to effective e-learning.

Research methods and data collection

This is a qualitative interpretive case study of 26 students who were purposively and conveniently selected because they were accessible; they were attending face-to-face lectures and then transitioned to e-learning due to the COVID-19 pandemic. After recruiting students through an electronic flyer, they signed consent forms with details of ethical issues (confidentiality, anonymity, and beneficence). I used interpretivism not to predict what students experience, but to understand and describe how they make meaning of their actions during the transition period in their own context of the School of Education shutdown (Creswell, 2014 ). Through the use of a more explorative case study design, I generated a rich and deep description of students’ experiences, which resulted in pioneering alternatives to overcome hindrances in realising e-learning (Yin, 2013 ).

Students were given an e-reflective activity to be completed in two weeks’ time, two sessions of Zoom group meetings for a period of 40 min each, and a WhatsApp one-on-one semi-structured interview for 35 min (Creswell, 2014 ; Yin, 2013 ). iCloud was used to record meetings and interviews for direct transcription to ensure trustworthiness (transferability, dependability, confirmability and credibility).

Data were thematically analysed using inductive and deductive reasoning (Creswell and Poth, 2017 ). The data generated by the three instruments were recorded and not transcribed, but directly and openly coded from the recorded source in order to avoid loss of meaning during transcription. Open coding was used to connect codes to categories. I deductively mapped the codes onto the set categories (from the theoretical framework and the literature) to form themes. However, I sought to use an inductive process to recapture the remaining codes, which were not deductively analysed during the prior analysis, to form categories. After using these processes as a guide, categories were focused and sharpened to form three themes, as indicated in the findings section

Consequently, two research questions were unpacked, namely: what are students’ experiences of the transition from face-to-face to e-learning and why their experiences are in particular ways when learning online. The first question gave answers to the first objective of the study, which is to understand students’ experiences of the transition from face-to-face to e-learning, and the second question addresses the second study’s objective, which is to find reasons that informs students’ experiences. This is elaborated in findings and discussion section in order to propose alternatives that can assist or allow students, particularly disadvantaged students, to realise or enjoy benefits of e-learning.

Presentation of findings

In this section, I present the key findings on students’ experiences of the transition from face-to-face to e-learning. I articulate the use of online resources and physical resources before crafting the alternative pathways through themes and its respective categories

Theme 1: Experiences of the use of online resources

Mpungose ( 2019b ) Agrees with Selwyn and Stirling ( 2016 ) that accessibility to online resources enhances effective e-learning. This suggests that e-learning is only possible provided students have access to online resources ranging from emails, software applications, learning management systems, social media sites and others. As such, Student 1 articulated, “ I keep on receiving emails saying the assignment that is due needs to be submitted on Moodle … I was informed that lectures will be recorded and posted on Moodle [learning management system]”. However, digital divides limits most students for effective e-learning particularly those staying in remote areas. Moreover, Student 4 confirmed this “… I only check my emails from the community library with internet access because I have no internet access and network service at home, but I can sometimes only receive voice calls and text messages from my phone… ”.

Internet access seem to play a major role in order to observe effective e-learning, but this can never be achieved if students have limited or no access. For instance, Student 7 asserted, “ I do not have data bandwidth [Internet access] at home …submitting assignment is impossible …”. This assertion shows that online assessment is impossible if the students have no access to the internet. Student get frustrated if lecturers keeps on demanding students to meet due dates while students have no internet access. As shown by Student 24 who articulated, “… having limited internet access but I am expected to submit an assignment next Friday, in a week’s time …a lecturer is briefing us to download resources from Moodle ”.

Furthermore, Selwyn ( 2016 ), as well as Khoza and Biyela ( 2019 ) share the same sentiment that social media sites plays a huge role in mitigating digital divide in order to realise e-learning in this digital age. As such, Student 5 indicated, “ since there is no Internet café by home, I use free Facebook or WhatsApp data bundles to communicate with other students …” This suggests that most students have access to social media sites because of free data bundle access provided by network service providers (Vodacom, Telkom, Cell C and others in a South African context), and this helps student to communicate learning. Consequently, Khoza ( 2019b ) further argue that having access to online resources without pedagogy behind the use can limit effective e-learning. This is witnessed by Student 12 who opined, “ I am so disappointed of this sudden shutdown without having proper ways or training in place to access lectures online … ” Similarly, Student 15 said, “W e are still not told which online platform will be used for online lectures … ” In other words, students seek adequate training on the use of online resources so that they can be well informed to avoid confusion. Evidently, Student 9 showed confusion by outlining that “… university informed us that lectures will be online, but they did not tell us the online platform is going to be used ”.

Theme 2: Experiences on the use of physical resources

Makumane and Khoza ( 2020 ) argue that traditional physical resources is influenced by professional reasoning in order to attain specific discipline goals during curriculum implementation. This suggests that traditional physical resources are fundamentals in addressing the module needs in e-learning. For instance, most of the students agreed with Student 23 who posited, “ I am currently depending on the hard copy of module outline and recommended books for studying because even libraries with Internet at home are also closed” . In other words, traditional physical resources like textbooks, module/course packs, and other hardcopies can act as an alternative pathway in case students have no internet access. While it is valuable for students to have access to modern physical resources like laptops, smartphones, Wi-Fi routers and others in order to enhance e-learning, but affordability to possess such resources remains a question because of social divide (poor socio-economic background). Thus, this remains the burden of the university to provide modern physical resources to students for successful e-learning. As such, student 14 asserted, “ …We were promised to get laptops when the academic calendar commences but still there are no laptop, and I end up using my smart phones for correspondence ”.

Similarly, Student 17 said, “ This shutdown will affect me because I am staying in remote areas away from campus and do not have funds to access Wi-Fi hotspot spaces like community libraries … and there are no funds provided for to support us… ” While the shutdown demands all lectures to be online and universities are also demanded to put measures in place for effective e-learning, but failure to provide all necessary resources to students can bring more frustration in the process. Evidently, Student 11 shared the same sentiment with other international students “ I will be suffering to find the transport to go and come back from home … Shutting down face-to-face lectures causes chaos since I do not have necessary equipment for learning”.

Discussion of findings

The adoption and use of online resources in a South African university shows the critical need to serve students for e-learning (van de Heyde and Siebrits, 2019 ). Van de Heyde and Siebrits ( 2019 ) further argue that online resources like learning management systems are highly used by universities for online lectures, but the form of customisation to adapt them to a local context may hinder learning. This is evident from students’ accounts on the use of Moodle for e-learning, where they stated that only a few students had access to the Moodle learning management system to download readings, slides and others during the transition from face-to-face to e-learning (at home). This suggests that Moodle was customised as a depository, and not to provide asynchronous online lectures. In other words, there was poor customisation of the Moodle learning management system to link with other online resources for chatting (Pear Deck), video conferencing (Zoom), and recording (CamStudio) and others (Anderson, 2016 ). Consequently, the findings indicate the general consensus that the Moodle learning management system alone is not capable of offering online lectures, but needs to be supplemented by other online software and social media sites. This suggests that, universities should start to think out of the box to consider social media site as an official platform to supplement learning management system to offer lecturers online.

Consequently, students therefore preferred social media sites (Facebook and WhatsApp) for communication, which were not officially adopted by universities for e-learning. In support of this, ‘prosumers’(students) as digital natives who are techno-savvy enjoy the use of Web 2.0 applications with good user-friendliness and swift communication (Clement, 2020 ; Ritzer and Jurgenson, 2010 ). Findings showed that even if students have limited access to internet but free data bundles form their social media sites account, they could access each other for content discussion and communication. As a result, Hamidi and Chavoshi ( 2018 ) further argue that if students can use social media sites successfully, universities should consider bringing social media sites (Snapchat, WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram, twitter and others for e-learning.

Moreover, the findings show that the university did not have any policy in place guiding the use of e-learning and nor was training provided. This situation as according to Yu ( 2016 ) is termed to be influence that leads to students’ technostress caused by the misfit between environmental demands (e-learning) and students abilities (access to online resources). In other words, the shutdown that occurred because of pandemic outbreak (COVID-19) demanded student to have access to online resources in order to take their lectures online while most of them are from remote areas having no internet access, and are still battling to use the newly introduced software for e-learning (video conference software like Zoom). As such, students were confused as to what resources were available for e-learning and how they will transition from face-to-face to e-learning. This was worsen by the unavailability of the guiding e-learning policy in place and no instructional designers employed by the university to provide relevant capacity building for students. As such, Mpungose ( 2019b ) assert that the power lies with the university management to use e-learning policy that can address issues on content dissemination, execution of assessment, and online resources in order to equip students with necessary skills for effective e-learning. This suggesst that policy viability on the use of online resources also give direction to both students and lecturers so that they can know their roles.

Several students agreed that traditional physical resources is the core of learning at the university, even if there are challenges hindering e-learning, because they relied on recommended books, module outlines, written notes and others. This proves that the old technology is irreplaceable, and that it acts as a back-up to e-learning. Thus textbooks, posters, charts and others must be made available to support students’ learning (Cuban, 1986 ; Freire, 1972 ). This suggests that traditional physical resources may be most useful to those students who have no or limited access to internet. As such, each module/course seek the need to have these resources in place even if the module/course is offered online. The use of traditional physical resources for learning displays a fruitful result for students’ knowledge acquisition (Simmonds and Le Grange, 2019 ). Moreover, traditional learning is vertical (formal) and driven by student knowledge for learning in a demarcated environment (Khoza and Biyela, 2019 ). This allows students have control over “selection of the content (selection), when and how they learn (pedagogy and sequence), as well as how quickly they learn (pace)” (Hoadley and Jansen, 2014 , p. 102). As result, students preferred and opted to use the nearest local community libraries with access to Wi-Fi rather than staying at home (often with no Internet) in order to access online resources irrespective of difficulties faced at home.

Most students did not have laptops, even though these were provided free of charge by the university (many had been sold for personal benefit). They preferred to use mobile phones with free network data bandwidth for communicating amongst themselves. In other words, the use of modern physical resources provides an easy way to ensure e-learning, because it provides access to recorded lectures and electronic resources like videos, but it needs good planning (Keengwe et al., 2008 ; Mpungose’, 2019a ). The main concern that hindered students from realising the full potential of e-learning was the expensive cost of Internet infrastructure such as Wi-Fi routers, laptops, mobile phones and access to data bandwidth. Consequently, Van Deursen and van Dijk ( 2019 ) argue that Internet access and technological resources (the first digital divide) is the main limiting factor in universities from developing countries like South Africa, even though students do have skills (the second first digital divide) to benefit from e-learning (the third first digital divide). In other words, the use (ideological resources) of any available physical resources is not a problem to students (digital natives) in a digital age—the problem is the affordability and availability of those physical resources for e-learning.

Towards alternative pathways for e-learning

This study explored students’ experiences during the transition from face-to-face to e-learning in a School of Education at a South African university. Based on the case study and the literature, including the guiding theoretical framework, the study identified benefits, challenges, and other related issues on the use of physical resources and online resources to realise e-learning. Most importantly, the interpretation of empirical data generated provides a summary of proposed alternative pathways and implications related to the use of physical resources and online resources to enhance effective e-learning. On the first hand, findings suggest that students are influenced by formal experiences (hardware), which seek students to use traditional physical resources to enhance e-learning. On the other hand, students are also influenced by informal experiences (software), seeking them to use online resources for effective e-learning. In complication this findings, students seem to miss non-formal experience (pedagogy), which seek them to use their own identities (love, passion, values, self-direction and others) to find thousand ways or theories to enhance a successful e-learning. Moreover, it is proven that e-learning resides in human and non-human appliances (Siemens and Downes ( 2009 ); thus students should be provided with relevant traditional resources (books, manuals, chats, posts and others) and modern resources (laptops, mobile phones/tablets, mobile Wi-Fi routers and others). In addition, free monthly Wi-Fi data bandwidth should be provided to students so that they may access e-learning, since this seems to be the main challenge to achieving e-learning in the South African context.

Downes ( 2010 ) argues that e-learning needs connectedness of specialised nodes or information sources, so that students can learn anyhow, anywhere and independently, at their own pace. To achieve this, this study therefore holds that the Moodle learning management system should not be used as a depository, but should be customised to be linked to social media sites (WhatsApp/Facebook), lecture-recording software (CamStudio), video and audio conferencing (Zoom, YouTube live, Skype, Microsoft Teams) and other learning resources in order to provide interactive lectures (both synchronous and asynchronous). This will serve to eliminate the dichotomy between face-to-face and e-learning, because the learning taking place when at the university should be the same as that which is available when students are at home.

The findings indicate that fully equipped university information centres should be identified and used to provide blended lectures, through the special arrangement of community libraries (since even these are not accessible now owing to COVID-19), in order to meet the needs of students coming from remote areas halfway. The findings also show that without proper planning, e-learning will never be achieved at a university. Hence, a university should have an e-learning policy, intense scheduled online learning capacity building, and allocated instructional designers (not technicians) to capacitate both lecturers and students.

All learning management system share the same features: pedagogy, learner environment, instructor tools, course and curriculum design, administrator tools, and technical specification features (Cavus and Zabadi ( 2014 ). However, the findings showed that the learning management system is missing the personal feature for students that will motivate them to love and have a passion for using online resources. This study posits that in order to leverage the potential of the Moodle learning management system, it should be linked with software that provides educational videos (NBC Learn), games for student-centred activities (game-based learning software), Edublogs (assessment for learning) and others. In other words, choosing what resources to use and learning to offer depends on rationale, time management and goals to be achieved during e-learning. This will assist students to incorporate both physical and online resources to achieve effective e-learning for these digital natives (Mpungose’, 2019a ; Prensky, 2001 ).

Despite challenges experienced by students in transitioning from face-to-face to e-learning—in particular, the prominence of the digital divide as the main hindrance to students realising effective e-learning—overall the customisation of the Moodle LMS to meet the local needs of disadvantaged students is beneficial to realise e-learning. Moreover, the findings indicate that while there may be many challenges that can hinder students from realising the full potential of e-learning, alternative pathways like the provision of free data bandwidth, free physical resources and online resources, and the use of an information centre for blended learning and others, seem to be the solution in the context of COVID-19.

However, it must be taken into consideration that while this can be the solution, students are unevenly challenged, and therefore still need capacity building on the use of learning management systems and other newly adopted online learning software. It is also imperative that university-wide teaching and learning pedagogy, instructional designers and e-learning policy consider the potential benefits and challenges when encouraging the use of e-learning.

Within the South African context, there is a critical need for increased investment in upgrading resources, both in universities and at community level, because of the digital divide. While there is still a need for further research, this article emphasises the both practical and theoretical alternative pathways that can be used to enable university students to realise the full potential of e-learning. Universities need to plan ahead of hindrances to learning such as a pandemic outbreak, student protests and others, and be abreast of the current literature on the rapidly evolving discipline of ET.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analysed during this study are available from the authors on reasonable request.

Ajlan A, Pontes E (2012) A comparative study between e learning features, methodologies, tools, and new developments for e learning Information system Management college of Business and Economics Qassim University Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 1(4):191–214

Amory A (2010) Education technology and hidden ideological contradictions. Educ Technol Soc 13(1):69–79

Google Scholar  

Anderson T (2016) Theories for learning with emerging technologies. Emerging technologies in distance education 7(1):7–23

Arkorful V, Abaidoo N (2015) The role of e-learning, advantages and disadvantages of its adoption in higher education. Int J Instruct Technol Distance Learn 12(1):29–42

Basitere, M, Mapatagane N (2018) E ffects of a Social Media Network Site on Student’s Engagement and Collaboration: a case study of WhatsApp at a University of Technology . Paper presented at the ECSM 2018 5th European Conference on Social Media

Bates A (2018) Teaching in a digital age: guidelines for designing teaching and learning for a digital age. Tony Bates Associates Ltd, London

Bell F (2011) Connectivism: Its place in theory-informed research and innovation in technology-enabled learning. Int Rev Res Open Distribut Learn 12(3):98–118

Article   Google Scholar  

Bennett S, Maton K, Kervin L (2008) The ‘digital natives’ debate: a critical review of the evidence. Br J Educ Technol 39(5):775–786

Black P, Wiliam D (2006) Inside the black box: raising standards through classroom assessment. Granada Learning, Northumberland

Black P, William D (2009) Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational assessment evaluation and accountability. J Personnel Eval Educ 21(1):5–31. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446250808.n13

Bunting I (2006) The higher education landscape under apartheid. Transformation in Higher Education . Springer, pp. 35–52

Cavus N, Zabadi T (2014) A comparison of open source learning management systems. Proc-Soc Behav Sci 143(1):521–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.430

Choudhury S, Pattnaik S (2020) Emerging themes in e-learning: a review from the stakeholders’ perspective. Comput Educ144(2020):1–20

Clement J (2020) Most popular social networks worldwide as of January 2020, ranked by number of active users. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users

Creswell J (2014) Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches, 3rd edn. SAGE Publications, inc., California

Creswell J, Poth CN (2017) Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches. SAGE Publications, inc., California

Cuban L (1986) Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. Teachers College Press

Damşa C, de Lange T, Elken M, Esterhazy R, Fossland T, Frølich N, Hovdhaugen E, Maassen P, Nerland M, Nordkvelle YT, Stensaker B (2015) Quality in Norwegian higher education: a review of research on aspects affecting student learning. NIFU press, London

DHET (2020) Measures to deal with the Coronavirus COVID-19 in the post-school education and training sector. https://www.gov.za/speeches/minister-higher-education-science-and-innovation-statement-measures-deal-covid-19-threat (Accessed 20 March 2020)

Dlamini R, Nkambule F (2019) Information and communication technologies’ pedagogical affordances in education. J Encyclopedia Educ Inform Technol 1(2019):1–14

Downes S (2010) New technology supporting informal learning. J Emer Technol Web Intellig 2(1):27–33. https://doi.org/10.4304/jetwi.2.1.27-33

Freire P (1972) Pedagogy of the oppressed. 1968. Myra Bergman Ramos, New York

Govender’ N, Khoza S (2017) Technology in Education for Teachers. In: Ramrathan L, Le Grange L, Higgs P (eds) Education studies for initial teacher development. Juta & Company (PTY) Limited, Cape Town

Graham CR (2006) Blended learning systems. The handbook of blended learning: global perspectives, local designs. Wiley imprint, San Fransisco

Hamidi H, Chavoshi A (2018) Analysis of the essential factors for the adoption of mobile learning in higher education: a case study of students of the University of Technology. Telemat Informat 35(4):1053–1070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.09.016

Hoadley U, Jansen J (2014) Curriculum: organizing knowledge for the classroom. Oxford University Press Southern Africa, Cape town

Jansen J (2004) Changes and continuities in South Africa’s higher education system, 1994 to 2004. Changing class: education and social change in post-apartheid South Africa. Oxford University Press Southern Africa, Cape town

Keengwe J, Onchwari G, Wachira P (2008) The use of computer tools to support meaningful learning. AACE J 16(1):77–92

Khoza S (2019a) 2 Lecturers’ reflections on curricular spider web concepts as transformation strategies. Transformation of higher education institutions in post-apartheid South Africa. Routledge, New York

Khoza S (2019b) Lecturers’ reflections on curricular spider web concepts transformation strategies. Transformation of higher education institutions in post-apartheid South Africa. pp. 15–26

Khoza S, Biyela AT (2019) Decolonising technological pedagogical content knowledge of first year mathematics students. Educ Inform Technol 2020(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10084-4

Kop R, Hill A (2008) Connectivism: learning theory of the future or vestige of the past? Int Rev Res Open Distribut Learn 9(3):1–13. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v9i3.523

Liu C, Long F (2014) The discussion of traditional teaching and multimedia teaching approach in college English teaching. Paper presented at the 2014 International Conference on Management, Education and Social Science (ICMESS 2014)

Makumane M, Khoza S (2020) Educators’ reasoning (s) and their effects on successful attainment of curriculum goals. South African J High Educ 34(2):95–111. https://doi.org/10.20853/34-2-3428

Manca S (2020) Snapping, pinning, liking or texting: Investigating social media in higher education beyond Facebook. Internet High Educ 44:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.100707

Mgqwashu’ E (2017) Universities can’t decolonise the curriculum without defining it first. www.conversation.com/universities-cant-decolonise-the-curriculum-without-defining-it-first-63948

Ministry of Education (2001) National Plan for Higher Education. Pretoria Government printers

Mpungose’ C (2019a) Is Moodle a Platform to Decolonise the University Curriculum? Lecturers’ Reflections. Africa Educ Review 17:1, 100–115, https://doi.org/10.1080/18146627.2018.1479645

Mpungose’ C (2019b) Is Moodle or WhatsApp the preferred e-learning platform at a South African university? First-year students’ experiences. Educ Inform Technol 1–15

Mpungose C (2020) Beyond limits: lecturers’ reflections on Moodle uptake in South African universities. Educ Inform Technol (1):1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10190-8

Mzangwa ST (2019) The effects of higher education policy on transformation in post-apartheid South Africa. Cogent Educ 6(1):1592737

Nikoubakht A, Kiamanesh A (2019) The comparison of the effectiveness of computer-based education and traditional education on the numerical memory in students with mathematics disorder. J Psychol Sci 18(73):55–65

Nocar D, Tang Q, Bártek K (2016) Educational hardware and software: digital technology and digital educational content. EDULEARN16 Proceedings. pp. 3475–3484

Prensky M (2001) Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On Horizon 9(5):1–6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424843

Ritzer G, Jurgenson N (2010) Production, consumption, prosumption: the nature of capitalism in the age of the digital ‘prosumer’. Journal of consumer culture 10(1):13–36

Rodrigues H, Almeida F, Figueiredo V, Lopes SL (2019) Tracking e-learning through published papers: a systematic review. Comput Educ 136(2019):87–98

Schofield J (2007) The dangers of Wi-Fi radiation (updated). https://www.theguardian.com/technology/blog/2007/may/21/thedangersof

Selwyn N (2004) Reconsidering political and popular understandings of the digital divide. New Media Soc 6(3):341–362

Selwyn N (2016) Minding our language: why education and technology is full of bullshit… and what might be done about it. Taylor & Francis, London

Selwyn N, Stirling E (2016) Social media and education…now the dust has settled. Learn Media Technol 41(1):1–5. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315121697

Siemens G (2005) Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age http://www.elearnspace.org.Articles/connectivism.htm (Accessed 28 March 2020)

Siemens G, Downes S (2009) Connectivism and connective knowledge 2009. Int J Instruct Technol Distance Learn 2(1):3–10

Simmonds S, Le Grange L (2019) Research in curriculum studies: reflections on nomadic thought for advancing the field. Transform High Educ 4:9

Swartz R, Ivancheva M, Czerniewicz L, Morris NP (2019) Between a rock and a hard place: dilemmas regarding the purpose of public universities in South Africa. High Educ 77(4):567–583

Swinnerton, B, Ivancheva, M, Coop, T, Perrotta, C, Morris, NP, Swartz, R,…Walji, S (2018) The Unbundled University: researching emerging models in an unequal landscape. Preliminary findings from fieldwork in South Africa. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Networked Learning 2018. Springer

University Moodle Training Guide (2017) Moodle. In: Univesity of Kwazulu-Natal (ed). University Pres, Durban

van de Heyde V, Siebrits A (2019) The ecosystem of e-learning model for higher education. South African J Sci 115(5-6):1–6

Van Deursen AJ, van Dijk JA (2019) The first-level digital divide shifts from inequalities in physical access to inequalities in material access. New Media Soc 21(2):354–375. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818797082

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Waghid F (2018) Action research and educational technology: cultivating disruptive learning. South African J High Educ 32(4):1–11

Warschauer M (2002) Reconceptualizing the digital divide. First Monday 7(7):1–16

WHO (2020) WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19-11 March 2020. https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19---11-march-2020 (Accessed 30 March 2020)

Yin RK (2013) Case study research: design and methods. Sage publications, New York

Yu KYT (2016) Inter-relationships among different types of Person–Environment fit and job satisfaction. Appl Psychol 65(1):38–65

Download references

Acknowledgements

I want to thank Prof. Simon Bheki Khoza for his supervision in to construct this article from a PhD research and Post-doctoral project, as well as Leverne Gething language for editing. Furthermore, I want to acknowledge support and advancement from the National Research Foundation (NRF) and the Fulbright scholarship within the framework of the Research and innovation.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Discipline of Science Curriculum and Educational Technology, School of Education, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa

Cedric B. Mpungose

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

I was the main author of this article and was involved in conceptualising the article. I have read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cedric B. Mpungose .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The author declares no competing interests.

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 license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license 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 license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Mpungose, C.B. Emergent transition from face-to-face to online learning in a South African University in the context of the Coronavirus pandemic. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 7 , 113 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00603-x

Download citation

Received : 05 April 2020

Accepted : 15 September 2020

Published : 02 October 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00603-x

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

This article is cited by

Face-to-face vs. blended learning in higher education: a quantitative analysis of biological science student outcomes.

• Claire V. Harper
• Lucy M. McCormick
• Linda Marron

International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education (2024)

Experiences of faculty and students regarding a locally developed framework for implementing interprofessional education during international electives in Sub-Saharan Africa

• Faith Nawagi
• Ian Guyton Munabi
• Aloysius Gonzaga Mubuuke

BMC Medical Education (2023)

Educational Technology Adoption in Instructional Delivery in the New Global reality

• Edna Nwanyiuzor Ogwu
• Ngozi Ugonma Emelogu
• Fredrick Amunabo Okwo

Education and Information Technologies (2023)

Academic learning hours post-COVID-19 according to online teaching–learning in higher education

• Michal Koren
• Roei Zerahia

Discover Education (2023)

How Personalization Affects Motivation in Gamified Review Assessments

• Luiz Rodrigues
• Paula T. Palomino
• Seiji Isotani

International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education (2023)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

You make this possible. Support our independent, nonprofit newsroom today.

• News & Stories

The pros, cons, and privilege of online learning during a pandemic

• RadioActive Youth Media
• Charlotte Engrav

Millions of students across the country are now learning to adapt to school closures because of the coronavirus.

But in the Puget Sound region, some independent schools have already been closed for weeks.

Radioactive Youth Media’s Charlotte Engrav is a student at one of them and she shares her experience, first-hand.

At the beginning of this month, Eastside Prep called an assembly and told us the school would be closing. Tons of kids cheered, but not everyone. I remember my friend Lexe Dinh-Le was in tears.

“I was just so sad because I couldn't imagine, like, not going to school and not, like, seeing my friends for nearly, what, a month?”

Even though school is closed, we still have online classes. They start at eight in the morning. We’re on the exact same schedule. We’re basically going to school as we normally would.

I don’t mind having school at home. I can take classes with my cat in my lap, I can take naps during my free period, and I can have lunch with my whole family. My dad is also working from home because of the coronavirus.

I know that some schools haven’t given out assignments for equity reasons-- because not all kids have the resources to work from home. But at our school we still have a lot of work to do. So far, I’ve had group quizzes in math, a Spanish project, and a lab in chemistry.

Some classes work really well online. But my friend Lexe says, others, not so much.

“For example, like chemistry. I had, like, a lab. I did a simulated lab. And it was like, that definitely doesn't work," she said.

The school is also trying to balance out our screen time, and in daily emails they encourage us to step away from the screens and get some fresh air.

For me, the hardest part of online school has been the emotional aspect. It can be lonely, and you miss out on the little hallway interactions which can really make your day. It can also get scary, because at home I’ve found I’m thinking a lot more about Coronavirus and the news.

Students across the state are being affected by these closures differently, and we’re all finding ways to support each other. One thing I’ve seen a lot on social media is the line, “If you need someone to talk to right now, my DMs are open.”

Listen to the interview by clicking the play button above.

• RadioActive Youth Media More stories from RadioActive Youth Media »
• Charlotte Engrav More stories from Charlotte Engrav »

Get Local Stories

Delivered to your inbox daily, weekly, or monthly..

• Reference Manager
• Simple TEXT file

People also looked at

Original research article, faculty’s and students’ perceptions of online learning during covid-19.

• 1 Department of English Language and Translation, Applied Science Private University, Amman, Jordan
• 2 Department of Political Science, Applied Science Private University, Amman, Jordan
• 3 Department of Self-Development Skills, Najran University, Najran, Saudi Arabia

COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted teaching in a vriety of institutions. It has tested the readiness of academic institutions to deal with such abrupt crisis. Online learning has become the main method of instruction during the pandemic in Jordan. After 4 months of online education, two online surveys were distributed to investigate faculty’s and Students’ perception of the learning process that took place over that period of time with no face to face education. In this regard, the study aimed to identify both faculty’s and students’ perceptions of online learning, utilizing two surveys one distributed to 50 faculty members and another 280 students were selected randomly to explore the effectiveness, challenges, and advantages of online education in Jordan. The analysis showed that the common online platforms in Jordan were Zoom, Microsoft Teams offering online interactive classes, and WhatsApp in communication with students outside the class. The study found that both faculty and students agreed that online education is useful during the current pandemic. At the same time, its efficacy is less effective than face-to-face learning and teaching. Faculty and students indicated that online learning challenges lie in adapting to online education, especially for deaf and hard of hearing students, lack of interaction and motivation, technical and Internet issues, data privacy, and security. They also agreed on the advantages of online learning. The benefits were mainly self-learning, low costs, convenience, and flexibility. Even though online learning works as a temporary alternative due to COVID-19, it could not substitute face-to-face learning. The study recommends that blended learning would help in providing a rigorous learning environment.

Introduction

COVID-19 was declared as a global pandemic in March 2020 ( WHO, 2020 ). It impacted all walks of life including education. It led to the closure of schools and universities. This closure put a considerable burden on the academic institution to cope with the unprecedented shift from traditional to online learning. The outbreak triggered new ways of teaching online. Most countries imposed restrictions, where the medium of education has shifted into either synchronous or asynchronous modes. The world has seen the most extensive educational systems disruption in history in more than 190 countries worldwide. The closure of the academic institutions has impacted up to 99% of the world the student population in the lower lower-middle-income ( The Economic Times, 2020 ). The outbreak of COVID-19 established partial or complete lockdown, where people are forced to stay home. The higher education institutions’ closure demands online learning, where the course material is taught. For instance, Jordan, an Arab country, has replaced face-to-face instruction with online learning platforms to control the outbreak’s spread. The government had imposed a national lockdown, which resulted in universities’ and schools’ closure.

Most global institutions opt to use synchronous and asynchronous online teaching methods: synchronous is where faculty and their students meet in a pre-scheduled time as a part of interactive learning classes, while the asynchronous method refers to the Faculty giving the course without interaction with the students. There is no interaction between the faculty and students. Asynchronous modes of online learning suit students to access online material whenever they like ( EasyLMS, 2021 ). Faculty are the role players in making learning enjoyable, shaping students’ attitudes and personalities, and helping students pass. COVID-19 spreads online learning culture across the culture ( Beteille et al., 2020 ). COVID-19 forced the shift to online learning, but some universities in underdeveloped countries are not adequately equipped to teach online efficiently. Moreover, the faculty’s training is different globally between high-income, middle, and lower income countries. Another major obstacle is the Internet connectivity for underprivileged students. It is a de facto that face-to-face instruction is more efficient than online and the complete shift to online during COVID-19 makes it necessary to investigate the perception of faculty and students on online learning to identify the advantages and disadvantages, and challenges of online learning.

While the whole world is facing much trouble in the last few months, it has been difficult for the world, and the impact of online learning has been significantly observed on faculty members and students in particular. Teaching and learning online has a wide range of advantages, yet poses some challenges. It makes the process of learning for students’ comfort due to time flexibility in attending classes. However, online learning acts as a barrier to the engagement of students in real class activities. Moreover, students lack the influence of peer learning. These challenges also leave an impact on student’s personalities and prevent them from taking their turns. Additionally, the faculty’s role is to teach, monitor, and provide advice for students on both academic and personal levels. The current crisis, COVID-19, highlights the role of the Internet and technology in all walks of life including education. The pandemic has shown the role of online education in coping with abrupt crises, and therefore it is significant to understand both faculty’s and student’s perceptions concerning online classes.

Online Learning

There is a considerable development in education, where the mode of instruction has been changed from teacher-centered education to student-centered education. In teacher-centered education, the teacher plays a role as the source of education, and students are recipients of his/her knowledge. In contrast, student-centered education emphasizes the role of students in knowledge production in the class. In a student-centered approach, the teachers’ role turns to “helper to students who establish and enforce their own rules. Teachers respond to student assignments and encourage them to provide alternative/additional responses. Student-centered instruction has currently benefited many new technologies by using the internet and other advanced technological tools to share, transfer, and extend knowledge” ( Hancock, 2002 ). Online learning has become a part of the 21st century as it makes use of online platforms. E-learning is defined as using online platform technologies and the Internet to enhance learning and provide users with access to online services and services ( Ehlers and Pawlowski, 2006 ).

Internet and education have integrated to provide users with the necessary skills in the future ( Haider and Al-Salman, 2020 ). A study by Stec et al., 2020 indicated that online teaching has three main approaches, namely, enhanced, blended learning, and online approach. Enhanced learning uses the intensive use of technology to ensure innovative and interactive instruction. Blended learning mixes both face-to-face and online education. The online approach indicates that the course content is delivered online. Online education is convenient for students, where they can access online materials for 24 h ( Stern, 2020 ). Online education turns education to be student-centered, where students take part in the learning process, and teachers work as supervisors and guides for students ( Al-Salman et al., 2021 ).

Online platforms have different tools to facilitate conducting online interactive classes to reduce students’ loss. Online education platforms are designed to share information and coordinate class activities ( Martín-Blas and Serrano-Fernández, 2009 ). There are most famous prominent interactive online tools: DingTalk (interactive online platform designed by Alibaba Group), Hangouts Meet (video calls tool), Teams (chat, interactive meetings, video, and audio calls), Skype (video and audio calls), WeChat Work (video sharing and calls designed for the Chinese), WhatsApp (video and audio calls, chat, and content share), and Zoom (video and audio calls, and collaboration features) ( UNESCO, 2020 ).

Online Learning Before COVID-19 in the Arab Region

Online learning works as an alternative for face-to-face education during COVID-19. It becomes the 21st efficient tool for online learning. The online learning experience is different globally. Some countries have the required resources to facilitate learning, while many others do not have the equipment available in high and middle-income countries. In the Arab region, some countries such as Jordan, KSA, Qatar, Emirates, Bahrain, and Kuwait are relatively developed compared to other Arab countries. During COVID-19, most Arab higher education institutions shifted to synchronous and asynchronous online learning methods. Jordan, an Arab country, initiated online learning in the Ministry of Education and Ministries of Planning and Information Technology in 2002 ( Dirani and Yoon, 2009 ). They worked to start the online experience by shifting instruction mode from traditional to virtual. In a similar vein, Talal Abu-Ghazaleh University launched the first online platform to facilitate recruiting and enrolling new students and conducting virtual classes in 2012.

Moreover, Jordan’s university established synchronous blended learning, where some theoretical courses are conducted online, while practical times are campus oriented. Jordan was one of the countries to respond to the crisis in creating an online platform, Darsak, to facilitate online learning for schools ( Audah et al., 2020 ). However, online learning was not considered as an education modality in Jordan before this crisis.

Online Learning During COVID-19

COVID-19 was classified by world health organization (WHO) as a pandemic disease on March 11, 2020. On March 19, emergency state was declared as a response to prevent the spread of COVID-19. It is followed by a curfew, which lasted for 2 months. The mode of education has turned online due to the closure of universities. The closure of universities brings the importance of having good infrastructure and the readiness to conduct online classes. Jordan is considered as one of the leading countries in Internet infrastructure and has a highly developed Middle East region ( Jordan Times, 2017 ). Online learning becomes a tool to prevent the outbreak and ensure social distancing. Online education has useful learning tools and grants 24/7 access to education platforms around the clock at their time preferences. It also offers flexibility, regardless of place and time. It also gives students questions, answers freely, and provides feedback on the assigned courses’ content ( Rosell, 2020 ).

Literature and Research Questions

The Author’s literature review has uncovered that the faculty and students shall verify online learning’s importance during COVID-19. Therefore, the present study aims to bridge the gap by scrutinizing faculty and students’ perceptions of online learning. To be specific, it raises the following questions:

1. What is the opinion and perceptions of the faculty in terms of;

a. Online platform used and teaching experience.

b. Attitudes of computer literacy and online class preparations.

c. Attitude of the effectiveness of online education.

2. What is the student’s opinion and perceptions on the Effectiveness of online teaching & learning during covid-19 pandemic?

3. What are the challenges of online teaching & learning during the covid-19 pandemic?

4. What are the advantages, challenges, and disadvantages of online learning?

Literature Review

Technology has a firm-established role in education experience in the last decade ( Almahasees and Jaccomard, 2020 ). Methods, techniques, and strategies of education have been revised to deal with dramatic changes in technology. The technological enterprises have designed several online platforms, which are driven by the integration of technology in all walks of life ( Al-Azawei et al., 2017 ; Englund et al., 2017 ; Santos et al., 2019 ). Technology has become part of our social, business, and educational life’. The use of the Internet has a vital role in disseminating knowledge via online classes ( Silva and Cartwright, 2017 ).

During COVID-19, education has been shifted into the techno-economic culture. The shift should associate with plans to reduce this shift’s impact on the normal learning process ( Gurukkal, 2020 ). The change to online in higher education entails reshaping our view regarding higher education, including institutions and students’ needs. For instance, theoretical courses can be taught online. In contrast, the practical courses should be conducted face to face to ensure best teaching practices in monitoring and guiding students. Therefore, technology can make larger classes flexible and suiting students’ needs ( Siripongdee et al., 2020 ).

Research on faculty members’ perceptions and attitudes toward online learning emphasized the role of instructors in facilitating communication and earning with students. Instructors acknowledged the content expertise and instructional design as the factors in the success of online learning. Similarly, the call for staff and student training is mandatory for online learning success ( Cheng and Chau, 2016 ).

The mode of education has turned into student-centered education, where students became independent learners. This is considered as an advantage as face-to-face instruction was teacher-centered education, where students receive their education from their instructors. Online learning initiated students’ role in using additional resources to discover their abilities as independent learners ( Roach and Lemasters, 2006 ). The comparison between students’ attitudes toward teaching the same interactive courses in online and face to face is similar. It is found that students performed equally at the same interactive courses in online and face-to-face instruction. Face-to-face instruction’s success depends on regular class attendance, while the interactive classes relied on completing interactive worksheets. Therefore, online and face-to-face success is based on curriculum structure, mode of delivery, and completion rate ( Nemetz et al., 2017 ). The COVID-19 outbreak shifts face-to-face education to online during the lockdown. This shift helps faculty integrate advanced technological skills in their teaching, which benefit students ( Isaeva et al., 2020 ).

Online learning has been considered a useful tool for learning, cost-effectiveness, flexibility, and the possibility of providing world-class education ( Jeffcoat Bartley and Golek, 2004 ; Gratton-Lavoie and Stanley, 2009 ; De La Varre et al., 2010 ). A study by Li and Lalani (2020) indicated that COVID-19 had brought change to the status of learning in the 21st century. The instruction mode has been changed at both schools and higher academic from face-to-face instruction to online instruction ( Strielkowski, 2020 ). However, this rapid change tests the capacity of institutions to cope with such crises. Many countries did not expect such a complete shift to be online, and therefore their working staff and students are not trained enough for this dramatic change.

Online learning works as a tool to overcome abrupt crises ( Ayebi-Arthur, 2017 ). Online learning is considered as an entertaining way to learn. It has a positive impact on both students and teachers alike. Both faculty and students have optimistic opinions about online classes ( Kulal and Nayak, 2020 ). Moreover, there is a positive correlation between students and faculty in their perception of teaching and learning ( Seok et al., 2010 ). Faculty and students of engineering specialties incurred that theoretical engineering subjects can be taught online, while teaching practical courses online are less effective and should be conducted at engineering labs ( Kinney et al., 2012 ). Similarly, students’ and faculty perceptions were marginalized differently in teaching laboratory courses online ( Beck and Blumer, 2016 ).

Faculty and students encountered challenges such as technology, workload, digital competence, and compatibility. They concluded that education would become hybrid, face-to-face, and online instructions ( Adedoyin and Soykan, 2020 ). A study to verify the usage of online learning platforms in teaching clinical medical courses was conducted. They found that the rate of student satisfaction is 26% ( Al-Balas et al., 2020 ). There is a slew of advantages and disadvantages of online learning. The benefits include efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and 24 h access, while the disadvantages are technical issues, lack of interaction, and training ( Gautam, 2020 ). Rayan, 2020 proposed ways to overcome the disadvantages of online learning by encouraging shy students to participate and provoke students’ online class attendance. Understanding such issues will help to deliver adequate online education. Online encourages shy students to participate and improve students’ attendance, while it also triggers a lack of social interaction that affects students.

Online learning has a vital role in learning during the crisis. Moreover, having properly maintained the technical infrastructure is required for its success at schools and universities ( Nikdel Teymori and Fardin, 2020 ). Dhawan, 2020 scrutinizes online learning’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT). He shows that crisis highlights the role of technology competency in dealing with the global crisis and facilitating learning. Therefore, schools should train students with the necessary IT skills. Another study was conducted on male and female students’ satisfaction in using E-learning portals in Malaysia. He found that there is a significant relationship between the user’s satisfaction and E-learning. The satisfaction rate by both participants depends on E-service quality and the information provided ( Shahzad et al., 2020 ). The advantages of online learning are as follows: flexibility, easy access, and interaction between learners and their professors ( Strayer University, 2020 ). The role and advantages of online learning have accentuated that online learning has challenges as data privacy. Students’ private information is at risk since they use their computers and mobile phones to access online portals. Universities should educate their staff and students about cybersecurity and data privacy ( Luxatia, 2020 ).

Methodology

Participants.

The population of the study was instructors and students at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels. Fifty faculty members and 280 students were selected randomly from this population, which is deemed significant to provide useful feedback on both faculty’s and students’ perceptions of online learning.

The study used two online surveys, which is delivered to participants in the period between September 15 and November 15 during the closure of universities in Jordan to control the spread of COVID-19. The online two surveys were created Google Forms and sent to the faculty and students through emails, Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp messages, and LinkedIn to have social distancing. Thirty-four male and fifteen female members of Faculty participated in the survey.

Thirty-eight participants hold Ph.D. and 11 master’s degrees. The mean of faculty ranges from 31 to 50 years old with an standard deviation (SD) of 1.00224. 47 members of the Faculty teach at university, while three members of the Faculty teach at college. Seven of the participants were professors, 11 associate professors, 18 assistant professors, nine lecturers, and four teaching assistants.

A total of 280 were undergraduate students. Eighty-eight were males, and 192 were females. As for the major, 175 were studying theoretical majors and 105 were studying in practical disciplines, 237 of them live in urban areas, and 43 live in rural areas. Of these, 151 were using mobile to access online classes and 106 were using laptops, while 25 of the students were using a tablet. One-hundred and forty-nine of the study samples indicated that they had received training in using the online classes, while 131 had received no training.

Data Gathering Instruments

Two online surveys were created by Google Docs. The faculty survey consisted of three parts such as sociodemographic, online education training, and faculty’s perceptions of teaching online effectiveness. On the other hand, the students’ survey consisted of four parts, namely, sociodemographic, students’ perception of online learning’s effectiveness, advantages, and challenges of online learning. The survey was designed in a Likert Scale format for rating statements. Two professors reviewed the two surveys, and proper changes were made before disseminating the two surveys of the participants. Participation in the study was voluntary, and personal information was not gathered. Data were imported into Excel to facilitate SPSS analysis using 25 versions.

Validity and Reliability

Two experts examined the two surveys cross out to validate the survey’s design. Their comments are taken into account of omitting some items of the survey due to their irrelevance. As for reliability, Cronbach’s alpha was used as a measure of internal consistency to indicate how the items are closely related. The result of the test showed that the items of the two surveys are consistent. For the faculty survey, the alpha coefficient for the 26 items is 0.889 for the faculty’s survey and 0.896 for the students’ survey, suggesting that the items have relatively high internal consistency. A reliability coefficient of 0.70 or higher is considered “acceptable” in most social science research situations ( Mockovak, 2016 ).

The findings are structured according to sections of the surveys.

Faculty’s Survey

Online teaching experience.

First, the current study scrutinizes the readiness of instructors to teach online. The analysis showed that most of the faculty had previous experience of teaching online before COVID-19, with a percentage of 60%. In contrast, 40% of the surveyed faculty did not have experience in teaching online before COVID-19. Those who had previous experience showed that they had received training to teach online with a percentage of 66%, while 34% did not have any activity to do online learning sessions.

The faculty showed that they used Zoom and Microsoft Teams in their online teaching with 60% for Microsoft Teams and 40% for Zoom. Finally, most participants uncovered that they used WhatsApp with 70% as a medium of communication between the tutor and his students outside the online class time. The second popular platform is Zoom and Microsoft Teams chat and text options with 28%. Moreover, Facebook pages occupied the third rank with 14%, while phone calls were used by 8% of the participants (see Table 1 ).

Table 1. Common online platforms and teaching experiences.

Faculty’s Attitudes of Computer Literacy and Online Class Preparations

The second division of the survey was to identify computer literacy and online class preparation to indicate computer and IT skills as shown in Table 2 . The majority of the respondents agreed that they have enough IT skills to conduct online classes. Moreover, online courses require more effort to do online courses in comparison to face-to-face instruction. Online learning becomes a tool to cope with all catalyst times such as COVID-19.

Table 2. Attitude of IT skills and online class preparations.

Faculty’s Attitude Toward the Effectiveness of Online Education

The third part of the survey was on the faculty’s attitude toward the effectiveness of online education. The faculty’s responses on the possibility of taking online courses without direct contact between the faculty and their students were centered on neutralism value, which was reflected in the mean scores of the instructors’ responses ( M = 3.1224, SD = 1.37890, p < 0.001). The faculty’s perception was also neutral in the second, third, fourth, and fifth items. The remaining items received agreement value except for the seventh item, which was between neutralism and agreement. These values were statistically significant after Bonferroni was corrected ( p < 0.001) (see Table 3 ).

Table 3. Faculty’s perception of the effectiveness of online teaching.

Students’ Survey

The effectveness of online teaching and learning during the covid-19 pandemic.

First, the study examined the effectiveness of online learning during COVID-19 (see Table 4 ). The effectiveness of online learning ranges in delivering online learning during the crisis with an SD of 0.67 and 3.548. This means the study participants found online learning useful due to the following reasons: first, students showed that they were provided with efficient online platforms by their institutions to attend lectures. The majority of the study’s respondents showed that they used Microsoft Teams in their online learning process. This is affirmed by Spataro (2020) that Microsoft Teams, as of the end of October 2020, has increased significantly to reach 115 million daily active users. Second, the study’s participants showed that they were trained and had the necessary technological skills to attend online learning. Trained students on online platforms could grasp the learning outcomes of online classes.

Table 4. The perception of online teaching & learning during the covid-19 pandemic.

Moreover, they also showed that they gained new experiences while attending online classes. Third, students emphasize that online learning platforms are easy to use. This means that students have got training to attend online classes, while the academic institutions may share guideline usage with their students. Furthermore, online learning allows flexible time to participate in courses whether they attend the classes synchronously (the exact time of the lecture) and asynchronously (recording the study). Fourth, students accentuated that they were satisfied with the student–teacher interaction during online teaching and learning.

Similarly, the participants showed their agreement on communications and asked questions to clear their doubts during online lectures. On the other hand, the study’s participants responded as neither agree nor disagree (NAND) to the question of whether students’ motivation is high in participating in online lectures. In the same vein, the study’s analysis indicated that they were not able to decide whether their home is suitable to attend online lectures. This means may the students may have got external distractions from their family members while attending online classes.

The research sample agrees on the effectiveness of learning using online classes with a mean of 3.548 (agree) and a standard deviation of 0.647. Most of these opportunities were: you have sufficient equipment and facilities with a mean of 4.09 and a standard deviation of 0.926, and you have adequate computer knowledge and IT skills to manage your online learning with a mean of 3.9321 and a standard deviation of 0.93845, and online tools are easy to use with a mean of 3.8929 and a standard deviation of 0.99242.

The Challenges of Online Teaching and Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The students emphasized that they faced a set of challenges through online learning due to the abrupt shift from face-to-face instruction to online instructions (see Table 5 ). Students’ responses showed that they faced the following challenges. First, students faced a challenge in adapting themselves to online learning. They could have such problems due to technical issues such as the lack of IT competency. Second, students faced a challenge in having proper access to the Internet for many reasons, such as the cost of having a fiber network, which is not affordable for some students. The students also reported that they faced challenges in managing their time and organizing their homework to submit their tasks. Moreover, some of the students have shown that the lack of interaction is also considered a challenge for students, reflecting on their progress and personalities.

Table 5. The challenges of online teaching and learning during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Moreover, they added that adjusting online classes for students with special needs is a tremendous challenge for deaf, hard of hearing, or disabilities. Furthermore, the study’s respondents also indicated that online learning classes lack insufficient tools for student assessment. Moreover, online learning classes do not let instructors identify the individual differences between students quickly. More importantly, the study’s analysis showed that students were concerned about their data privacy since using their laptops or mobile phones at home, which exposes their data for breach.

It is obvious from Table 5 that the research sample agrees with the learning challenges using online classes with a mean of 3.704 (agree) and a standard deviation of 0.600. The most important of these challenges came for adjusting online courses to deaf or hard of hearing five students and students with disabilities with an average of 3.8143 and a standard deviation of 0.995. Moreover, technical and Internet issues occupied the second rank with a mean of 3.7857 and a standard deviation of 0.996, and the organization of work processes and time management with an average of 3.7036 and a standard deviation of 1.020.

The Advantages of Online Teaching and Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Students opined that online learning ensures that the students will have access to the learning materials based on their convenient time if online learning classes are asynchronously recorded at any time in a day. Moreover, online learning encourages students to take part in the learning process since the instruction mode shifted to focus on student learning (self-paced learning). Students also expressed that online learning helped them to acquire new experiences and skills. It also reduced the cost of traveling to universities and related expenses. Use of traveling resources and other charges as shown in Table 6 .

Table 6. The advantages of online teaching and learning during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Table 3 indicates that the research sample agrees on the advantages of learning using online classes with an average of 3.673 (agree) and a standard deviation of 0.858. The most important of these features were in (self-paced learning) with a mean of 3.789 and a standard deviation of 0.970, and you can learn whatever you want with a mean of 3.778 and a standard deviation of 1.064, and comfort advantage with a mean of 3.707 and a standard deviation of 1.139.

An analysis of the faculty’s and students’ responses showed their perception of online learning during COVID-19. Faculty were surveyed in terms of online teaching experience, computer literacy, class preparation, and online learning effectiveness. On the other hand, students were studied in terms of online energy, challenges, and advantages. The significant results were interpreted and discussed below.

The analysis showed that 68% of the faculty members had undergone training, while 32% did not have. Exercise is part of development programs provided by universities to equip their staff with the necessary skills. This criterion highlights Faculty Academic Development Centers’ role to have plans to deal with all abrupt crises such as COVID-19. Training programs should not be limited to faculty; they should also involve students. The study found that Zoom and Microsoft Teams were used by the surveyed faculty more than others in conducting virtual classes. Moreover, WhatsApp is the most popular platform for communication between faculty and their students outside classrooms. WhatsApp has been used by more than 2 billion users monthly as of October 2020 ( Statista, 2020 ).

Faculty’s Perception of Computer Literacy and Online Class Preparations

The majority of respondents revealed that they had computer competency before the emergence of COVID-19. This competency helped the faculty to do online classes since IT skills are mandatory for the technology learning environment, as indicated by Li and Lee (2016) . However, the study showed that faculty preferred traditional teaching, face to face, more than online. Face-to-face instruction allows the ability to discuss and have lively guidance for your students. It encourages students’ engagement and reflects positively on the level of students ( Cooke, 2020 ). Therefore, most of the faculty members indicated that online classes’ preparation entails more effort to ensure having interactive online courses.

Faculty’s Perception of the Effectiveness of Online Teaching

The study showed that faculty agreed on the point of online learning To be concise, faculty responses were debatable whether students at online classes can outperform students with face-to-face instruction, as reflected in the item’s mean score ( M = 2.9388). However, the fact is that face-to-face students need the education to excel in online learning results in scores of faculty responses ( M = 3.8367). Faculty also showed that the lack of interaction between students and their instructors might lead to low performance. The faculty were asked if they were able to assess students fairly. The study’s results showed that faculty knew the individual differences between students in online classes. Moreover, online courses helped them to achieve the learning outcomes of their academic syllabi.

Faculty’s Perception of Time and Assignment Management

The analysis revealed that the faculty agreed to make their online sessions short. This finding showed that online classes should not keep the students’ attention and ensure their understanding. If the online course is long, the students may get bored and distracted. As for online class preparation, the participants agreed that online classes require more time than traditional classes. Of course, preparation for online courses entails a longer time than regular classes.

Regarding assignments, the faculty agreed that students should do more assignments in online learning than in traditional classes. Remote teaching requires students to do more tasks than conventional courses to ensure students’ effective practice. Besides, students’ assignments may compensate the students for the lack of direct contact with the tutors.

Online Learning Effectiveness and Challenges During COVID-19

This study highlights undergraduate students’ perceptions, which showed online learning as a flexible and useful learning source during the crisis and some limitations. According to students, online learning is a relaxed and productive source of knowledge. Most of them agreed that online learning helps students 24 h to have access to learning materials asynchronously at any time in a day. This finding correlates with ( Adedoyin and Soykan, 2020 ; Gautam, 2020 ) that online learning offers learners the ability to access online materials around the clock. Moreover, it also encouraged self-learning, where the student plays a role in the process of learning. Online learning reduces the cost of education, where students stay at home and do not pay any charge for traveling and other expenses. More importantly, students learned new experiences through learning, such as time management and self-discipline.

Student Challenges During COVID-19

The analysis revealed that the students faced difficulties when attending online classes. Based on the findings, these challenges lie in students’ struggle to adapt to online courses, lack of direct contact with the faculty, lack of motivation to attend classes, and time management. This list of challenges should be considered by course coordinators and program chairs by offering solutions to these challenges. Students viewed the issue of adapting to the transference from face to face to online instructions as a challenge. This is a great challenge since most countries were not prepared enough to cope with abrupt crises that we did not have before. Students also highlighted that online platforms are not easily adjustable to deaf, hard of hearing, or special needs students. The government should help such students by offering courses provided by specialists of students with special needs. Students also complained about the lack of interaction, reflecting on students’ achievements and their personalities. Technical Internet connectivity issues also affect learning via learning modalities. This challenge can be overcome by improving the speed of the Internet packages provided to students. In this context, governments should offer Internet packages to students at low cost, and the telecommunication companies should help students. Similarly, students were concerned about their data privacy since their information was exposed to breach by external parties, they use their laptops and PCs available at their homes. This requires that universities should educate students about data privacy. They also have to provide students with free firewall programs to protect their data, as also suggested by Luxatia (2020) .

The study scrutinized the perception of the faculty and students on online learning. The study showed that online education is less effective than online classes. The students of online learning face several challenges due to the struggle to complete adaptation to online courses and the lack of interaction between students and their tutors. E-learning platforms motivate student-centered learning, and they are easily adjustable during abrupt crises, such as COVID-19. The universities in Jordan should take part in training students on how to protect their data. Moreover, the government should advise telecommunication companies to improve the students’ services at an affordable price. It is worth mentioning that students with special needs should have synchronous classes, where the special needs specialists should have a role to facilitate such students’ process.

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Author Contributions

KM and MA made substantial contributions to the conception, research questions, or design work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work, drafted and revised the work, and proofread the final version of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Adedoyin, O. B., and Soykan, E. (2020). Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: the challenges and opportunities. Interact. Learn. Environ. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180 [Epub ahead of print].

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Al-Azawei, A., Parslow, P., and Lundqvist, K. (2017). Investigating the effect of learning styles in a blended e-learning system: An extension of the technology acceptance model (TAM). Austral. J. Educ. Technol. 33, 1–23. doi: 10.14742/ajet.2741

Al-Balas, M., Al-Balas, H. I., Jaber, H. M., Obeidat, K., Al-Balas, H., Aborajooh, E. A., et al. (2020). Distance learning in clinical medical education amid COVID-19 pandemic in Jordan: Current situation, challenges, and perspectives. BMC Med. Educ. 20:341. doi: 10.1186/s12909-020-02257-4

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Almahasees, Z., and Jaccomard, H. (2020). Facebook translation service (FTS) usage among jordanians during COVID-19 lockdown. Adv. Sci. Tech. Eng. Syst. 5, 514–519. doi: 10.25046/aj050661

Al-Salman, S., and Haider, A. S. (2021). Jordanian University Students’ views on emergency online learning during COVID-19. Online Learn. 25, 286–302. doi: 10.24059/olj.v25i1.2470

Audah, M., Capek, M., and Patil, A. (2020). COVID-19 and Digital Learning Preparedness in Jordan. Available online at: https://blogs.worldbank.org/arabvoices/covid-19-and-digital-learning-preparedness-jordan (accessed November 27, 2020).

Google Scholar

Ayebi-Arthur, K. (2017). E-learning, resilience and change in higher education: Helping a university cope after a natural disaster. E Learn. Digit. Med. 14, 259–274. doi: 10.1177/2042753017751712

Beck, C. W., and Blumer, L. S. (2016). Alternative realities: Faculty and student perceptions of instructional practices in laboratory courses. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 15:ar52. doi: 10.1187/cbe.16-03-0139

Beteille, T., Ding, E., Molina, E., Pushparatnam, A., and Wilichowski, T. (2020). Three Principles to Support Teacher Effectiveness During COVID-19. Three Principles to Support Teacher Effectiveness During COVID-19. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Cheng, G., and Chau, J. (2016). Exploring the relationships between learning styles, online participation, learning achievement and course satisfaction: An empirical study of a blended learning course. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 47, 257–278. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12243

Cooke, G. (2020). Online Learning vs Face to Face Learning | Elucidat. Available online at: https://www.elucidat.com/blog/online-learning-vs-face-to-face-learning/ (accessed January 17, 2021).

De La Varre, C., Keane, J., and Irvin, M. J. (2010). Enhancing online distance education in small rural US schools: A hybrid, learner-centred model. ALT J. Res. Learn. Technol. 18, 193–205. doi: 10.1080/09687769.2010.529109

Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: a panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. J. Educ. Technol. Syst. 49, 5–22. doi: 10.1177/0047239520934018

Dirani, and Yoon (2009). View of Exploring Open Distance Learning at a Jordanian University: A Case Study | The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. Available online at: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/599/1215 (accessed January 9, 2021).

EasyLMS (2021). Difference Synchronous vs Asynchronous Learning | Easy LMS. Available online at: https://www.easy-lms.com/knowledge-center/lms-knowledge-center/synchronous-vs-asynchronous-learning/item10387 (accessed January 9, 2021).

Ehlers, U.-D., and Pawlowski, J. M. (2006). “Quality in European e-learning: an introduction,” in Handbook on Quality and Standardisation in E-Learning , eds U. D. Ehlers and J. M. Pawlowski (Berlin: Springer), 1–13. doi: 10.1007/3-540-32788-6_1

Englund, C., Olofsson, A. D., and Price, L. (2017). Teaching with technology in higher education: understanding conceptual change and development in practice. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 36, 73–87. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2016.1171300

Gautam, P. (2020). Advantages and Disadvantages of Online Learning - eLearning Industry. Available online at: https://elearningindustry.com/advantages-and-disadvantages-online-learning (accessed December 1, 2020).

Gratton-Lavoie, C., and Stanley, D. (2009). Teaching and learning principles of microeconomics online: An empirical assessment. J. Econ. Educ. 40, 3–25. doi: 10.3200/JECE.40.1.003-025

Gurukkal, R. (2020). Will COVID 19 turn higher education into another mode? High. Educ. Future 7, 89–96. doi: 10.1177/2347631120931606

Haider, A. S., and Al-Salman, S. (2020). Dataset of Jordanian university students’ psychological health impacted by using E-learning tools during COVID-19. Data in Brief 32:106104. doi: 10.1016/j.dib.2020.106104

Hancock, R. (2002). Classroom Assistants in Primary Schools: Employment and Deployment. Available online at: https://www.academia.edu/26061509/Classroom_assistants_in_primary_schools_Employment_and_deployment (accessed November, 2020).

Isaeva, R., Eisenschmidt, E., Vanari, K., and Kumpas-Lenk, K. (2020). Students’ views on dialogue: improving student engagement in the quality assurance process. Qual. High. Educ. 26, 80–97. doi: 10.1080/13538322.2020.1729307

Jeffcoat Bartley, S., and Golek, J. H. (2004). Evaluating the cost effectiveness of online and face-to-face instruction. Educ. Technol. Soc. 7, 167–175.

Jordan Times (2017). ‘Jordan Leading in Internet Infrastructure in Region’ | Jordan Times. Available online at: http://www.jordantimes.com/news/local/jordan-leading-internet-infrastructure-region ’ (accessed January 9, 2021).

Kinney, L., Liu, M., and Thornton, M. A. (2012). “Faculty and student perceptions of online learning in engineering education,” in Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference , (Washington, DC: American Society for Engineering Education).

Kulal, A., and Nayak, A. (2020). A study on perception of teachers and students toward online classes in Dakshina Kannada and Udupi District. Asian Assoc. Open Univ. J. 15, 285–296. doi: 10.1108/aaouj-07-2020-0047

Li, C., and Lalani, F. (2020). The Rise of Online Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic | World Economic Forum. Available online at: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/04/coronavirus-education-global-covid19-online-digital-learning/ (accessed December 1, 2020).

Li, L.-Y., and Lee, L.-Y. (2016). Computer literacy and online learning attitude toward GSOE students in distance education programs. High. Educ. Stud. 6:147. doi: 10.5539/hes.v6n3p147

Luxatia (2020). The Importance Of Digital Learning Spaces During COVID-19 and Beyond | Luxatia International. Available online at: https://www.luxatiainternational.com/article/the-importance-of-digital-learning-spaces-during-covid-19-and-beyond (accessed December 9, 2020).

Martín-Blas, T., and Serrano-Fernández, A. (2009). The role of new technologies in the learning process: moodle as a teaching tool in physics. Comput. Educ. 52, 35–44. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.005

Mockovak, W. (2016). “Assessing the reliability of conversational interviewing,” in Proceedings of the Joint Statistical Meetings , Washington, DC.

Nemetz, P. L., Eager, W. M., and Limpaphayom, W. (2017). Comparative effectiveness and student choice for online and face-to-face classwork. J. Educ. Bus. 92, 210–219. doi: 10.1080/08832323.2017.1331990

Nikdel Teymori, A., and Fardin, M. A. (2020). COVID-19 and educational challenges: a review of the benefits of online education. Ann. Milit. Health Sci. Res. 18:e105778. doi: 10.5812/amh.105778

Rayan, P. (2020). E-learning: The advantages and Challenges. Available online at: https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/351860 (accessed December 1, 2020).

Roach, V., and Lemasters, L. (2006). Satisfaction with online learning: a comparative descriptive Study. J. Interact. Online Learn. 5, 317–332.

Rosell, C. (2020). COVID-19 Virus: Changes in Education | CAE. Available online at: https://www.cae.net/covid-19-virus-changes-in-education/ (accessed January 9, 2021).

Santos, J., Figueiredo, A. S., and Vieira, M. (2019). Innovative pedagogical practices in higher education: An integrative literature review. Nurse Educ. Today Churchill Livingstone 72, 12–17. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2018.10.003

Seok, S., DaCosta, B., Kinsell, C., and Tung, C. K. (2010). Comparison of instructors’ and students’ perceptions of the effectiveness of online courses. Q. Rev. Distance Educ. 11, 25–36.

Shahzad, A., Hassan, R., Aremu, A. Y., Hussain, A., and Lodhi, R. N. (2020). Effects of COVID-19 in E-learning on higher education institution students: the group comparison between male and female. Qual. Quant. doi: 10.1007/s11135-020-01028-z [Epub ahead of print].

CrossRef Full Text | PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

Silva, M., and Cartwright, G. F. (2017). The internet as a medium for education and educational research. Educ. Libr. 17:7. doi: 10.26443/el.v17i2.44

Siripongdee, K., Pimdee, P., and Tuntiwongwanich, S. (2020). A blended learning model with IoT-based technology: Effectively used when the COVID-19 pandemic? J. Educ. Gift. Young Sci. 8, 905–917. doi: 10.17478/JEGYS.698869

Spataro, J. (2020). Microsoft Teams Reaches 115 Million DAU—Plus, a New Daily Collaboration Minutes Metric for Microsoft 365 - Microsoft 365 Blog. Available online at: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/blog/2020/10/28/microsoft-teams-reaches-115-million-dau-plus-a-new-daily-collaboration-minutes-metric-for-microsoft-365/ (accessed January 15, 2021).

Statista (2020). Most Popular Social Media Platforms [Updated April 2020]. Available online at: https://www.oberlo.com/statistics/most-popular-social-media-platforms (accessed November 14, 2020).

Stec, M., Smith, C., and Jacox, E. (2020). Technology enhanced teaching and learning: exploration of faculty adaptation to iPad delivered curriculum. Technol. Knowl. Learn. 25, 651–665. doi: 10.1007/s10758-019-09401-0

Stern, J. (2020). Introduction to Online Teaching and Learning. Available online at: http://www.sloan-c.org/resources/index.asp (accessed November, 2020).

Strayer University (2020). Benefits of Online Learning | Strayer University. Available online at: https://www.strayer.edu/benefits-and-challenges (accessed December 2, 2020).

Strielkowski, W. (2020). COVID-19 pandemic and the digital revolution in academia and higher education. Preprints 2020:2020040290. doi: 10.20944/preprints202004.0290.v1

The Economic Times (2020). Covid-19 pandemic created largest disruption of education in history, affecting 1.6 billion students: UN SG Guterres - The Economic Times. Available online at: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/covid-19-pandemic-created-largest-disruption-of-education-in-history-affecting-1-6-billion-students-un-sg-guterres/articleshow/77344094.cms (accessed January 9, 2021).

UNESCO (2020). Distance Learning Tools. Available online at: https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse/support (accessed January 9, 2021).

WHO (2020). WHO Director-General’s Opening Remarks at the Media Briefing on COVID-19 - 11 March 2020. Available online at: https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19—11-march-2020 (accessed January 18, 2021).

Keywords : perceptions of online learning, online learning, education during COVID-19, blended learning, online learning in Jordan, benefits and challenges of online learning

Citation: Almahasees Z, Mohsen K and Amin MO (2021) Faculty’s and Students’ Perceptions of Online Learning During COVID-19. Front. Educ. 6:638470. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2021.638470

Received: 06 December 2020; Accepted: 24 March 2021; Published: 12 May 2021.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2021 Almahasees, Mohsen and Amin. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Zakaryia Almahasees, [email protected]

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Student Opinion

Is Online Learning Effective?

A new report found that the heavy dependence on technology during the pandemic caused “staggering” education inequality. What was your experience?

By Natalie Proulx

During the coronavirus pandemic, many schools moved classes online. Was your school one of them? If so, what was it like to attend school online? Did you enjoy it? Did it work for you?

In “ Dependence on Tech Caused ‘Staggering’ Education Inequality, U.N. Agency Says ,” Natasha Singer writes:

In early 2020, as the coronavirus spread, schools around the world abruptly halted in-person education. To many governments and parents, moving classes online seemed the obvious stopgap solution. In the United States, school districts scrambled to secure digital devices for students. Almost overnight, videoconferencing software like Zoom became the main platform teachers used to deliver real-time instruction to students at home. Now a report from UNESCO , the United Nations’ educational and cultural organization, says that overreliance on remote learning technology during the pandemic led to “staggering” education inequality around the world. It was, according to a 655-page report that UNESCO released on Wednesday, a worldwide “ed-tech tragedy.” The report, from UNESCO’s Future of Education division, is likely to add fuel to the debate over how governments and local school districts handled pandemic restrictions, and whether it would have been better for some countries to reopen schools for in-person instruction sooner. The UNESCO researchers argued in the report that “unprecedented” dependence on technology — intended to ensure that children could continue their schooling — worsened disparities and learning loss for hundreds of millions of students around the world, including in Kenya, Brazil, Britain and the United States. The promotion of remote online learning as the primary solution for pandemic schooling also hindered public discussion of more equitable, lower-tech alternatives, such as regularly providing schoolwork packets for every student, delivering school lessons by radio or television — and reopening schools sooner for in-person classes, the researchers said. “Available evidence strongly indicates that the bright spots of the ed-tech experiences during the pandemic, while important and deserving of attention, were vastly eclipsed by failure,” the UNESCO report said. The UNESCO researchers recommended that education officials prioritize in-person instruction with teachers, not online platforms, as the primary driver of student learning. And they encouraged schools to ensure that emerging technologies like A.I. chatbots concretely benefited students before introducing them for educational use. Education and industry experts welcomed the report, saying more research on the effects of pandemic learning was needed. “The report’s conclusion — that societies must be vigilant about the ways digital tools are reshaping education — is incredibly important,” said Paul Lekas, the head of global public policy for the Software & Information Industry Association, a group whose members include Amazon, Apple and Google. “There are lots of lessons that can be learned from how digital education occurred during the pandemic and ways in which to lessen the digital divide. ” Jean-Claude Brizard, the chief executive of Digital Promise, a nonprofit education group that has received funding from Google, HP and Verizon, acknowledged that “technology is not a cure-all.” But he also said that while school systems were largely unprepared for the pandemic, online education tools helped foster “more individualized, enhanced learning experiences as schools shifted to virtual classrooms.” ​Education International, an umbrella organization for about 380 teachers’ unions and 32 million teachers worldwide, said the UNESCO report underlined the importance of in-person, face-to-face teaching. “The report tells us definitively what we already know to be true, a place called school matters,” said Haldis Holst, the group’s deputy general secretary. “Education is not transactional nor is it simply content delivery. It is relational. It is social. It is human at its core.”

Students, read the entire article and then tell us:

What findings from the report, if any, surprised you? If you participated in online learning during the pandemic, what in the report reflected your experience? If the researchers had asked you about what remote learning was like for you, what would you have told them?

At this point, most schools have returned to in-person teaching, but many still use technology in the classroom. How much tech is involved in your day-to-day education? Does this method of learning work well for you? If you had a say, would you want to spend more or less time online while in school?

What are some of the biggest benefits you have seen from technology when it comes to your education? What are some of the biggest drawbacks?

Haldis Holst, UNESCO’s deputy general secretary, said: “The report tells us definitively what we already know to be true, a place called school matters. Education is not transactional nor is it simply content delivery. It is relational. It is social. It is human at its core.” What is your reaction to that statement? Do you agree? Why or why not?

As a student, what advice would you give to schools that are already using or are considering using educational technology?

Students 13 and older in the United States and Britain, and 16 and older elsewhere, are invited to comment. All comments are moderated by the Learning Network staff, but please keep in mind that once your comment is accepted, it will be made public and may appear in print.

Find more Student Opinion questions here. Teachers, check out this guide to learn how you can incorporate these prompts into your classroom.

Natalie Proulx joined The Learning Network as a staff editor in 2017 after working as an English language arts teacher and curriculum writer. More about Natalie Proulx

Taking distance learning ‘offline’: Lessons learned from navigating the digital divide during COVID-19

Subscribe to the center for universal education bulletin, angelica towne amporo and angelica towne amporo chief strategy and innovation officer & co-founder - educate hawah nabbuye hawah nabbuye 2018 echidna global scholar - the brookings institution, uganda country director - educate uganda @hawahhawah.

August 7, 2020

As we adjust to life during a global pandemic, it’s hard to imagine what life was like over a century ago during outbreaks. While in the past most faced quarantines without a telephone or a radio, today there is an expansive universe online. Even as the coronavirus forces physical isolation, the spectacular technological advances of the digital age make local and global connection possible. However, within education, the new centrality of communication technology in the context of the vast digital divide means the pandemic is exacerbating inequality, excluding many youth from their right to learn.

Prior to the outbreak of COVID-19, our East African youth skills organization, Educate! , reached youth primarily through national education systems—delivering our model directly in schools or working with the government. For over a decade, we’ve been operating this way, partnering with secondary schools in Uganda to prepare youth with the skills to succeed in today’s economy, as well as working on systems-level integration of skills-based learning in Uganda, Rwanda, and Kenya. But schools across East Africa have been closed since March, and access to tools like smartphones, internet, and electricity is scarce in the region. This means that many distance learning strategies being deployed in other parts of the world are not feasible, and we’ve observed a significant gap in solutions for youth. The challenges inherent to delivering distance learning in resource-constrained areas remain largely unsolved—requiring creative, context-driven solutions.

Our approach

When schools across East Africa closed in mid-March, Educate! acted quickly to launch a response—aiming to embrace the now and act swiftly —pivoting to deliver components of our skills-based model to youth remotely through radio, SMS (text messaging), and interactive voice response (“robocalls”). During this time, our team began executing extensive remote learning research, as well as developing data collection platforms, which would be key to ensuring our program best fit the needs of our learners.

Although moving to distance learning was new territory for us, luckily we didn’t have to reinvent the wheel. First, we invested in learning from the many organizations working to tackle the digital divide prior to COVID-19: Girl Effect in girls’ empowerment, Eneza and M-Shule in academic learning, and the countless organizations providing learning continuity in humanitarian emergencies . Leveraging these learnings and equity-focused best practices , our local teams of curriculum and learning experience designers hit the ground running.

In just over three months of implementation, we’ve experienced exciting progress and key breakthroughs, coupled with failures, flops, and stubborn challenges—all of which have been critical for developing distance learning strategies of our own. By sharing our emerging best practices, we hope to contribute to the creation of quality and equitable distance learning solutions, allowing young people in every corner of the world to stay engaged with their education.

Lessons learned for effective distance learning solutions

1. leverage user data to tailor programmatic design to learner realities.

Our greatest obstacle has been determining how to consistently reach youth with limited access to the internet and connectivity through phone or radio. To address this challenge and inform an effective response, we needed to deeply understand our students’ realities. And to understand our students’ realities, we needed data! While we leveraged existing country data on school closures, as well as young people’s broad access to technology, we needed to collect data specific to our students’ lives. We needed to understand what life was like at home, how frequently our students could access a phone or radio, what barriers they faced learning outside the classroom, and if gender affected their ability to participate.

While collecting data under countrywide coronavirus restrictions has been challenging, it has been critical for informing our response. To collect data, our team leveraged low-tech means, including disseminating surveys to youth through SMS, WhatsApp, and phone calls. We leveraged phone-based surveys to guide our programmatic decisionmaking and used WhatsApp groups for rapid design feedback. We have also targeted data on gender, developing a data point within our student contact database, allowing us to disaggregate by gender. As our team targets equal participation among boys and girls in our programming, disaggregation by gender has been critical for informing our remote gender equity strategy (discussed below in learning #5).

While these data collection platforms don’t reach all of our students, these systems have generated rich datasets on key indicators, such as participation. A key barrier we discovered through student surveys is that many youth have taken on new home responsibilities, cutting into time for their studies. Mornings are especially busy, as many students are completing household chores or supporting their families with agricultural work. In response to these learnings, we scheduled radio lessons on the weekends and sent learning prompts via SMS later in the day, when youth had finished their chores. By listening closely to our students and looking at a holistic picture of their lives, we have been able to increase participation in our remote programming quite simply, without addressing the complex issues of technology access.

2. Go beyond broadcasting content: Layer strategies and build in interaction

It’s widely recognized that real and meaningful learning occurs in the classroom only when curriculum goes beyond rote memorization and lecture-based instruction. We believe that the same approach should be applied to distance learning, so we have prioritized hybrid distance learning strategies that have two-way engagement built in.

We are taking a multipronged approach in Uganda—leveraging radio for content delivery, with robocalls, SMS, and remote mentorship for follow-up assessment, engagement, and guidance. While we don’t believe that distance learning strategies can replace in-person instruction, we think that “layering” strategies with built-in engagement can strengthen their impact. Evidence backs this up: In Kenya, a study examining the multimedia platform Shujazz showed that youth exhibited positive behavior changes after receiving targeted content through comics, social media, and SMS. Lastly, building in student responses to these mechanisms has the added advantage of supporting critical data collection.

3. Look for new ways to engage families

As schools began to close in March, our team urgently worked to collect student phone numbers to enroll students in our remote programming. However, of the 13,000 phone numbers we were able to collect, fewer than 50 percent were active. In addition, research conducted by our team at the outset of the pandemic found that many of our students only have access to a shared device for about 30 minutes per day.

Drawing on lessons learned from past emergencies, we conducted targeted outreach to parents and family members. We quickly learned that youth could participate more consistently in our remote programming if they used a family member’s phone rather than their own, as parents and relatives were more likely to own a phone as well as keep their phone numbers active. We also believe this strategy enhances the quality of the learning for youth because parents can help ensure their children engage actively with learning prompts. Further, a number of studies show that when communities and parents are engaged in students’ learning, academic achievement increases.

After targeting outreach to families, we saw a 29 percent increase in participation in our remote programming, and since launching, we have grown our reach from roughly 10 percent of our previous student level to 50-60 percent, with the expectation that our reach will continue to grow as we scale nationally. As with all things technology-enabled, this growth is exponential and has a snowball effect, so we’re hopeful about the future.

4. Incorporate story-based learning to keep youth engaged

Our team leveraged this feedback to rewrite radio scripts, rework linear learning activities, and introduce new characters within the lessons. While we are continuing to iterate on our distance learning curriculum, we are already beginning to see a positive impact, as 90 percent of our listeners have reported they relate to these story-based activities.

5. Think critically about pedagogy and content delivery to better support girls

Educate!’s curriculum was developed with gender responsiveness at the forefront, and we’ve designed our model to address critical gaps girls face—such as asset and skills gaps—to impact life outcomes. As we’ve worked to transition our curriculum to entirely new delivery mechanisms, we have taken a deliberate approach to integrating gender equity within our remote programming’s design and delivery.

Leveraging the data collection strategies outlined above, we discovered that boys in our programming were more likely to own their own phones than girls—making it challenging for our female learners to participate actively during radio lessons, as well as with assessments and learning prompts delivered via SMS. While we are still working to tackle the core issue of access among female learners, our team has set out to support girls and promote equal participation through a variety of programmatic components.

Our team of designers ensures that the content of every lesson and learning prompt delivered by radio or SMS is gender-responsive. For example, lead characters within our curriculum are female secondary school students, and we select confident female entrepreneurs within our case studies. Through our in-school model, we’ve seen that this strategy is effective in combating the socialization of girls to be quiet and reserved, as well as the negative stereotypes that typecast girls as less competent. In addition to gender-responsive pedagogy, we have begun exploring the implementation of all-girl listener groups as a way to create safe spaces at home for female learners. Following the release of a radio lesson, a female Educate! youth mentor convenes five to 10 girls on a conference call, where they connect to reflect on what they learned in the lesson, as well as discuss challenges they face learning at home.

In the foreseeable future, it seems likely that restrictions on gatherings will remain, limiting the education sector’s ability to reach youth directly in schools. By sharing these early lessons in effective distance learning, we believe we can work together as a sector to navigate this new normal. Together, we can rethink traditional education on a global level—pushing it further into the 21st century and toward a more equitable future.

Related Content

Hawah Nabbuye

November 7, 2018

November 6, 2018

July 24, 2018

Education Technology Global Education

Global Economy and Development

Sub-Saharan Africa

Center for Universal Education

The Brookings Institution, Washington DC

8:30 am - 4:30 pm EDT

Thinley Choden

May 3, 2024

Ghulam Omar Qargha, Rachel Dyl, Sreehari Ravindranath, Nariman Moustafa, Erika Faz de la Paz

How Hybrid Learning Is (and Is Not) Working During COVID-19: 6 Case Studies

• Share article

Most U.S. school districts are currently using “hybrid learning”—a mix of in-person and online instruction. The precise nature of that mix, though, varies greatly from school to school, based on factors including the local rate of COVID-19 transmission, the availability of funds to support new instructional approaches, and the willingness of students and staff to return to buildings.

Many students chose to learn entirely in-person or entirely online this school year. Others are spending a couple days a week in person and the rest at home. Some schools have set aside the bulk of slots for in-person instruction for vulnerable groups like students with special needs, English-language learners, and students experiencing homelessness.

These approaches aren’t static. Increases in COVID-19 spread have forced some schools in hybrid mode to revert back to full-time remote learning, while others started out fully remote and are now slowly transitioning more students to some in-person instruction.

Close to two-thirds of district leaders said their school systems are doing hybrid learning, according to an Education Week Research Center survey last month .

As with almost everything schools are doing during the pandemic, hybrid learning has inspired a wide range of reactions. Many parents and students are grateful schools are finding creative ways to bring their children back to school buildings while taking precautions against COVID-19. Others have protested schools’ reluctance to fully resume in-person instruction or expressed confusion over complex school plans that seem to be constantly changing. Some teachers find the new demands of hybrid instruction overwhelming, while others are more eager to adapt.

“Hybrid learning can be a best of both worlds, or a worst of both worlds reality,” said Bree Dusseault, practitioner-in-residence at the University of Washington’s Center for Reinventing Public Education, which has been surveying schools throughout the pandemic.

In the best-case scenario, schools can keep students and staff safe while providing them with valuable in-person instruction that gives them the tools to do meaningful schoolwork at home. At worst, teachers are forced to cut corners on instruction, schools struggle to transition students seamlessly from in-person to remote and vice versa, and students who are learning at home get left behind compared with students who choose to spend at least some time in person.

That last possibility threatens to further widen equity gaps along racial lines. In an EdWeek survey this fall , Latino, Black, and Asian parents were more likely than white parents to report their children would engage in full-time remote learning.

Pulling off an instructional approach that’s completely new to most U.S. schools during a pandemic is no easy feat, either. The challenges partially come from a lack of adequate resources: Congress has yet to follow through on plans for a second multi-billion-dollar stimulus package for education, and school budgets are increasingly stretched thin as the pandemic takes a toll on state and local finances.

At Scofield Magnet Middle School in Stamford, Conn., students have chosen either full-time remote learning or a hybrid model with in-person classes a few days a week and remote instruction for the rest. Teachers are not live-streaming classwork to any students who are learning at home. Placing cameras in classrooms was difficult, and connectivity issues were common for the school’s students, half of whom are eligible for free and reduced-price meals.

“If you have two or three kids in a home and you have them all logged in live-streaming all day, that’s going to eat up your data pretty quick,” said Scott Clayton, the school’s principal.

The trickiest part, according to Clayton, has been getting students to complete assignments at home, where they might have other responsibilities like child care or a part-time job.

Many schools also have struggled to balance investments in personal protective equipment and other safety precautions for in-person instruction with the technology and professional development necessary to reach students who will be learning at home part- or full-time, Dusseault said.

She recommends schools actively survey parents and students, and try to structure classes to make the most of students’ time either in person or at home, in whatever hybrid configuration they choose.

“They have to be putting resources into everything that it takes to result in a quality classroom experience: the materials, the training, the curriculum,” she said. (For more on how to do this work, visit Education Week’s guides to balancing in-person and remote instruction and pivoting back to full-time remote learning if necessary .)

The ongoing chaos of the pandemic sometimes obscures the lessons schools are learning and the strategies they’re employing to overcome steep challenges. Education Week talked to educators from school districts across the country about how they developed their hybrid learning models, how they’re working so far, and what they have planned for the months ahead. Here is a look at hybrid models in six school districts and the challenges of making those approaches work.

VICTORIA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Texas

Enrollment: 14,000

The Model: Students chose at the beginning of the year from two options: Attend school in person five days a week, or attend school virtually five days a week. Teachers’ classes are a mix of in-person and virtual students.

The Challenges: Jennifer Atkins, a 7th grade English teacher at Howell Middle School, typically enjoys walking around her classroom to engage students. Social distancing and masks make that teaching style virtually impossible.

She’s also had to deal with the ongoing evolution of the composition of her classes. When school started, roughly half her students were online. But as parents have grown more comfortable with sending students back to school, that proportion has shifted—roughly 90 of her students attend in person, and 50 are at home.

“I have the same kids, the same roster, but now I’ve got a new group that’s coming face to face that I haven’t met in person,” Atkins said. “They have been away from some of their friends for so long. It’s interesting to see how the class dynamic changes.”

Atkins posts textbook PDFs online because some students don’t have the book at home, even though the school set up times for parents to pick up the books. Grading takes longer because she has to look at some hard copies and then log in online for the rest.

Howell students aren’t required to keep their cameras on during videoconference instruction, so Atkins worries that some students may have logged in at the beginning but aren’t actually paying attention. “Without being here and constantly reminded to stay on task, it is probably enticing to log into the meeting and then just walk away,” she said.

The Benefits: Atkins has been able to use technology tools to keep better track of which students are struggling. If they don’t open an assignment, for instance, “something’s got to be wrong,” and she has a tangible record of the student’s progress, she said.

Hybrid learning has also forced her to consider more innovative use of technology in her teaching. A handful of teachers were offered interactive whiteboards that students can access from their desks, and Atkins accepted. Prior to COVID-19, she might have resisted a big change like this because she saw it as unnecessary, but the rising use of technology as a teaching tool has made her think differently.

A Small Victory: To help students at home hear her voice better through the mask, Atkins logs into the virtual meeting on her laptop and her smartphone, and talks into the microphone on her phone, addressing the remote and in-person students simultaneously, while using a clicker to scroll through PowerPoint slides on the computer.

The Takeaway: “It is nothing short of exhausting,” Atkins said. “It’s basically like teaching two different classes at the same time in one class period.”

SANTA FE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, New Mexico

Enrollment: 13,000

The Model: The district is gradually bringing students into school buildings based on the number of teachers who are willing to return and the amount of space in classrooms to allow for adequate social distancing. Special education students and English-language learners are prioritized for in-person instruction, and students who eventually want to go back to face-to-face instruction are placed with the teachers who are teaching from the school building.

The Challenges: Managing in-person and virtual instruction simultaneously requires more digital devices than many teachers have in their classrooms, said Tom Ryan, chief information and strategy officer for the district. Ideally, they need one for the lesson, one for seeing the students’ faces, and one to monitor what students are doing on their school-issued devices. Cameras that pivot when a teacher moves are also ideal to prevent teachers from constantly exiting the frame when they move around.

Meanwhile, the digital divide remains a significant barrier for equitable remote instruction. Some students attend day-care facilities with inadequate internet connections for videoconferencing. Other students have school-provided hotspots that may not be sufficient for the amount of strain remote learning puts on the connection. Efforts to determine the minimum bandwidth necessary for what’s required of students learning at home are still underway, Ryan said.

The Benefits: Teachers who wanted to return to classrooms are eager to serve as test cases for how in-person instruction can work during these unprecedented times, said Ryan. Giving teachers the option to stay home engenders more goodwill and prevents people with underlying health conditions from having to choose between their job and their safety.

So far, Ryan’s team has found teachers need a microphone to amplify their voices through their masks, and that simply replicating face-to-face instruction while livestreaming to students may not be as effective as offering online students differently structured activities from their in-person counterparts. Younger students and English-language learners are particularly likely to struggle when they can’t see a teacher’s mouth movements, Ryan said.

A Small Victory: Ryan’s daughter, a 5th grade teacher in the district, said she’s had more robust contact with parents than ever before. One student learning remotely in her class was constantly disrupting the class, pulling out inappropriate household objects, and sleeping on camera. After communicating with his parents, Ryan’s daughter decided to work with him individually after school hours, when his parents could be there by his side.

“I’m not saying I recommend this for all the teachers,” Ryan said. But “there are options that are available now that weren’t available last year.”

The Takeaway: “This isn’t a comparison between online versus face to face. This is between having nothing at all or something that is still engaging the kids and instruction can happen,” Ryan said. “Some are very successful and other kids are struggling.”

MARSHALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Mich.

Enrollment: 1,000

The Model: Elementary school students attend school in person four days a week, and middle and high school students attend school in person three days a week. In both cases, students are split into five groups, with each one having their remote learning on a different day of the week. The district tried to ensure that students who live in the same household have the same remote learning day. A handful of English-language learners, students with special needs, and newcomers to the district attend school in person every day. And some students opted to learn at home full-time for the school year.

The Challenges: “I would say our teachers are very overwhelmed,” said Beth Ritter, the district’s director of teaching and learning. “I’m not going to sugarcoat it.”

Each day, teachers have some students who are missing, which means it’s hard to keep all students on the same page. The students who are at home full time could easily get lost in the shuffle if teachers don’t put in extra work to engage them. And the quality of instruction this year needs to be higher than in the spring, when emergency remote teaching set everyone back.

“We have that experience to fall back on, but yet teachers are doing so much more this year,” Ritter said.

The Benefits: Hybrid learning has led to some positive changes. Meetings with multilingual families have gone a lot smoother for interpreters than usual. Rather than having to rush from room to room in the school building on a busy night of in-person conferences, all they have to do is open a new Microsoft Teams meeting to enter a video conversation. Families also appreciate that they don’t have to scramble for day-care options when they need to meet with their students’ teachers.

The hybrid model also forces teachers to be more intentional about how they structure their lessons. Elementary teachers now focus on reading, math, and social-emotional learning when students are in person, while home assignments build on what students learned in class.

A Small Victory: The district has appointed “assurance of mastery coaches” in elementary schools to check in with students during their remote learning day. Students get to have some interaction with the school even when they’re not in the building, and teachers get a small reprieve from yet another responsibility.

The Takeaway: With big changes like a heightened emphasis on social-emotional learning, school administrators need to communicate clearly and regularly with teachers and staff who will be implementing these changes. “We’ve always known it, but we’ve really found that this year,” Ritter said.

MILTON AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT, Pa.

Enrollment: 2,000

The Model: Students who chose a mix of in-person and remote instruction attend school buildings on Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday. Other students are doing 100 percent synchronous online instruction, or largely asynchronous instruction through the Milton Cyber Academy, which existed prior to the pandemic.

The Challenge: Students learning remotely—particularly the older ones—have been reluctant to turn on their cameras and keep their microphones unmuted. “K-5 is absolutely great—they are happy to see their classmates,” said Cathy Keegan, the district’s superintendent.

But some groups of older students have been very quiet, forcing teachers to get more creative with ensuring that they’re engaged. As of this month, the district is now specifying to students doing synchronous learning that they’re expected to be ready to speak and be seen when a teacher calls on them.

Some parents have fallen behind on notifying the school when their student won’t be attending at-home instruction that day. “We’re reinforcing that,” Keegan said.

The Benefits: Discipline rates in the district have been sharply down this year compared with previous years, Keegan said. “We genuinely believe—this is just a feeling—that kids are just happy to be back,” she said. Keeping them at home might have exacerbated the social isolation that has prompted many experts to urge schools to find safe ways to reopen.

A Small Victory: The president of the district’s teachers union told Keegan she and other teachers were tired of spending valuable time at the start of each class period asking students to type their name in the chat as a means of taking attendance. Keegan’s team helped advise her on integrating a discussion question into the Microsoft Teams platform that teachers can use to jump-start that day’s lesson and take attendance simultaneously.

The Takeaway: Efforts to transform an American education model that hasn’t been comprehensively updated in generations are happening at a breakneck pace, Keegan said. It’s painful and necessary work: “We may still be back here in 2022.”

NORTHERN LEHIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, Pa.

Enrollment: 1,550

The Model: Students can attend in-person instruction up to two days a week: Monday and Tuesday for students with last names starting with the letters A through L, and Thursday and Friday for students with last names starting with M through Z. When students aren’t in school buildings, they’re learning at home, and Wednesdays are reserved for one-on-one check-ins for all students. Nearly three-quarters of students have chosen that option.

Slightly less than a fifth of students have chosen to learn from home all week. Some teachers have been assigned to work exclusively with fully online students.

Another less popular option (3 percent of the district’s students) is an existing online program offered by the school but managed by a third-party vendor; the district has revamped that asynchronous online program to include more direct involvement from a district teacher for students in grades K-8.

The Challenge: Teachers have had to adjust to a curriculum that must be more streamlined than usual. District leaders have urged teachers to consider which aspects of the learning material are essential and which could be optional. “We don’t want the curriculum to become a barrier to achieving success,” said Matthew Link, the district’s superintendent.

Early in the school year, many virtual students weren’t showing up or turning in work on time. The district’s professional development efforts have helped teachers get more creative in engaging students who are at home. Still, for certain students, “we need to double down on our efforts to make sure they’re active participants in the process,” Link said.

A Small Victory: District administrators are recognizing more than ever the value of teachers collaborating with each other, said Tania Stoker, the district’s assistant superintendent. One teacher might be using a tool another teacher doesn’t know about it; that kind of sharing is much more common now than it used to be.

The Takeaway: “Know that it’s OK that when you’re developing your plan and you think it’s done, it’s probably not. You’re going to go through different iterations constantly,” Link said. “Don’t feel bad if you have to change something that you thought was the answer.”

WALL TOWNSHIP SCHOOLS, N.J.

Enrollment: 3,400

The Model: Elementary students are either fully remote or fully in-person.

In grades 6-8, students attend school in person every other day (except Wednesday). Teachers have the same students in their class each day—the only thing that changes is which ones are in person and which ones are online. On Wednesdays, all students learn online.

In-person instruction is reserved for lessons on math, English, and social studies. Next semester, they’ll switch to science instruction. “We had been hopeful and optimistic that we would be in fully live instruction when we really need that practical application in lab,” but that may not be the case, said Lisa Gleason, the district’s director of curriculum and instruction.

The Challenge: Simply having a Chromebook doesn’t mean all the problems are solved. The district has found those devices can’t support all the resources and instructional technology programs that teachers use. “We had to pivot and start acquiring more PCs,” Gleason said. The district also was hit recently with a cyberattack that prompted some teachers to work from home until the problem was resolved.

Substitute teachers who think they’re capable of teaching online or comfortable with the health risks of teaching in person have been difficult to find, even as the number of teachers who need to take time off for legitimate reasons is higher than usual.

A Small Victory: Some teachers who are particularly worried about COVID-19 exposure can teach remotely from a separate area of the school building that students don’t visit. Some students in those teachers’ classes are attending school in person, but they are supervised by another teacher who is in a physical classroom with them, while others are at home, in the same Google Meet link as the remote teacher.

“We had really analyzed what our needs were back in late August,” Gleason said. “We were able to craft teachers’ schedules around that.”

The Takeaway: “When you put all your eggs in the basket of technology being the main vehicle for delivering instruction, even in the hybrid model, it takes away that stability of having a human being in the classroom who can deliver instruction no matter what,” Gleason said.

Alyson Klein, Assistant Editor contributed to this article. A version of this article appeared in the November 25, 2020 edition of Education Week as How Hybrid Learning Is (and Is Not) Working During COVID-19: 6 Case Studies

Sign Up for The Savvy Principal

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

Questionable Experience: The Advantages and Disadvantages of Remote Learning Essay

Introduction, disadvantages, thoughts and reflections.

The pandemic came to the world unexpectedly and forced a densely populated planet to rethink its relationship to many hitherto standard practices of social interaction. Workplace, logistical and informational infrastructures were being reconsidered. The medical system in every country was stressed and is still under pressure. The educational system has been hit just as hard, which in my opinion, has not benefited it at all.

Like all students whose studies have fallen during a period of lockdowns and all sorts of restrictions reaching the point of panic, I am eager to share my experience. Two years of studying remotely have caused me to think about many issues, some of which are by no means delightful, and each of which I will attempt to address below. To begin with, attention will be drawn to the benefits, which are there after all. To better understand and communicate my experiences and beliefs, it will be most convenient to use the method of comparing the situation with experiences in the standard training format.

The amount of free time grows at times – this is the primary and most noticeable plus in remote learning. All the hours that might have been spent on the commute can be used for other things. Theoretically, there is more time for self-development, homework, or outside hobbies (Hobbs & Hawkins, 2020). With a stable network connection, all materials needed for learning are categorized, structured, and within a minute’s reach.

Living with their own family is especially relevant for dorm students, most of whom have had a meaningful opportunity to return home to almost ordinary life and continue their studies from their private rooms (Morgan, 2020). Not everyone can call this a full-fledged plus, but family reunification sometimes does not resonate fully with a young person who craves freedom. Nevertheless, at the very least, it translates into savings in the cost of living.

The ability to self-organize and self-allocate my time has likewise positively impacted my perception of distance learning. In my opinion, with motivation and material, a student on a remote schedule can show better results in processing or analyzing information, writing, and developing networking skills. Since most instructors provide a tutorial course with scheduled deadlines, order of completion, and links to third-party resources, this ability is facilitated.

However, for all the advantages of remote learning, I found many more disadvantages that far outweigh all the positives. The first of these is the lack of socialization: almost all friends and acquaintances from the study group are on lockdown, and joint videoconferencing or chatting will never replace full-fledged communication with the group (Hobbs & Hawkins, 2020). It is incredibly frustrating because I value a good, noisy company where I can feel like I belong or play sports together.

Furthermore, the lack of motivation seemed to be an impressive disadvantage of such training. With all my understanding of the importance and interest in learning, it is not always possible to concentrate and take advantage of the same opportunity to organize my own work as conveniently as possible. All researchers of the new type of learning testify to this – for example, Morgan (2020) mentions this situation more than once. From the same point arises a closely related next one.

Procrastination is a term with which I have become acquainted through the process of remote learning. I had heard of the concept before but hadn’t given it much thought, and it wasn’t until I was forced into a lockdown that I realized it was the scariest thing. Deadlines seem so far away, even if they only consist of a few hours. Social media, media entertainment, or even just a newsfeed is always right at my fingertips and can be addictive for a long time (Morgan, 2020). Sometimes I’ve even caught myself sitting relaxed and staring at one point for short periods, which used to be entirely out of character for me. Stress is the result of all of the above and its same catalyst. Perhaps it is an individual thing, but many of my acquaintances have voiced similar thoughts. Sitting in four walls under lockdown puts a lot of pressure on the psyche, exacerbated by the need to study diligently and keep up with the group.

Consequently, in comparison to standard training, remote training was not easy for me. The lack of live communication, which seemed so easy to replace with digital communication, is noticed only during such lockdowns. After all, even preferring to communicate online, I saw dozens of people every day, many of whom were acquaintances of mine, and exchanged at least a couple of phrases. It cannot be replaced entirely by a smartphone or laptop screen, as I had previously thought. I felt disconnected from reality and didn’t always perceive people in videoconferences in training as my live classmates.

With that said, I think the partial implementation of remote learning is necessary and convenient. Training effectiveness will soar many times over if, for example, two days a week are used to make full-time attendance and the remaining days are used for remote learning. In my opinion, this will be possible because it preserves most of the benefits of distance learning while minimizing stress and adding motivation through face-to-face meetings with educators.

From my own experience, I can summarize that it is unlikely that the pandemic and remote learning have benefited the quality of education. The lack of practice, socialization, and motivation may sooner or later affect the level of graduates, causing a drop in quality in all fields of endeavor. I believe that the partial introduction of distance learning can be beneficial, which cannot be said for complete lockdown and homeschooling.

Hobbs, T. D., & Hawkins, L. (2020). The results are in for remote learning: It didn’t work . Wall Street Journal (Eastern Ed.) . Web.

Morgan, H. (2020). Best practices for implementing remote learning during a pandemic . Clearing House (Menasha, Wis.) , 93 (3), 135–141. Web.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, May 19). Questionable Experience: The Advantages and Disadvantages of Remote Learning. https://ivypanda.com/essays/questionable-experience-the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-remote-learning/

"Questionable Experience: The Advantages and Disadvantages of Remote Learning." IvyPanda , 19 May 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/questionable-experience-the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-remote-learning/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'Questionable Experience: The Advantages and Disadvantages of Remote Learning'. 19 May.

IvyPanda . 2024. "Questionable Experience: The Advantages and Disadvantages of Remote Learning." May 19, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/questionable-experience-the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-remote-learning/.

1. IvyPanda . "Questionable Experience: The Advantages and Disadvantages of Remote Learning." May 19, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/questionable-experience-the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-remote-learning/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Questionable Experience: The Advantages and Disadvantages of Remote Learning." May 19, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/questionable-experience-the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-remote-learning/.

• Working During the Covid-19 Pandemic
• How COVID Times Will Be Remembered in History
• Reflection on the Post-COVID Education Articles
• Assessment Effectiveness: Examining Pre, Post, and In-Lesson Practices
• Social Studies: Traditional and Authentic Assessments
• Note-Taking Habits of 21st-Century College Students
• Fairness in Classroom Assessment
• Best Technology Tools for Learning