iafor

journal of education
COVID-19: education
responses to a pandemic
Volume 9 – Issue 2

Editor-in-Chief: Yvonne Masters

ISSN: 2187-0594

iafor
IAFOR Journal of Education
Volume 9 – Issue 2

IAFOR Publications
The International Academic ForumIAFOR Journal of Education: Special Issue
COVID-19: Education Responses to a Pandemic
Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Editor-in-Chief
Yvonne Masters, Australia

Published by The International Academic Forum (IAFOR), Japan
IAFOR Publications, Sakae 1-16-26-201, Naka-ward, Aichi, Japan 460-0008

Executive Editor: Joseph Haldane
Publications Manager: Nick Potts
IAFOR Journal of Education: Special Issue
COVID-19: Education Responses to a Pandemic
Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021
Published April, 2021
IAFOR Publications © Copyright 2021
ISSN: 2187-0594
ije.iafor.org

IAFOR Journal of Education: Special Issue
COVID-19: Education Responses to a Pandemic
Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021
Edited by Yvonne Masters

Editorial Advice
Preparing a submission to the IAFOR Journal of Education is more than writing about yourresearch study: it involves paying careful attention to our submission requirements. Different
journals have different requirements in terms of format, structure and referencing style, among
other things. There are also some common expectations between all journals such as the use ofgood academic language and lack of plagiarism. To assist you in reaching the review stage forthis or any other peer-reviewed journal, we provide the following advice which you should
check carefully and ensure that you adhere to.
1. Avoiding Plagiarism
Plagiarism is a practice that is not acceptable in any journal. Avoiding plagiarism is the cardinalrule of academic integrity because plagiarism, whether intentional or unintentional, ispresenting someone else’s work as your own. The IAFOR Journal of Education immediately
rejects any submission with evidence of plagiarism.
There are three common forms of plagiarism, none of which are acceptable:
1. Plagiarism with no referencing. This is copying the words from another source (article,
book, website, etc.) without any form of referencing.
2. Plagiarism with incorrect referencing. This involves using the words from anothersource and only putting the name of the author and/or date as a reference. Whilst not as
grave as the plagiarism just mentioned, it is still not acceptable academic practice.
Direct quoting requires quotation marks and a page number in the reference. This isbest avoided by paraphrasing rather than copying.
3. Self-plagiarism. It is not acceptable academic practice to use material that you havealready had published (which includes in conference proceedings) in a new submission.
You should not use your previously published words and you should not submit about
the same data unless it is used in a completely new way.
2. Meeting the Journal Aims and Scope
Different journals have different aims and scope, and papers submitted should fit the specificjournal. A “scattergun” approach (where you submit anywhere in the hope of being published)
is not sound practice. Like in darts, your article needs to hit the journal’s “bullseye”, it needs
to fit within the journal’s interest area. For example, a submission that is about building bridges,
will not be acceptable in a journal dedicated to education. Ensure that your paper is clearly
about education.
3. Follow the Author Guidelines
Most journals will supply a template to be followed for formatting your paper. Often, there will
also be a list of style requirements on the website (font, word length, title length, page layout,
and referencing style, among other things). There may also be suggestions about the preferred
structure of the paper. For the IAFOR Journal of Education these can all be found here:
https://iafor.org/journal/iafor-journal-of-education/author-guidelines/

4. Use Academic Language
The IAFOR Journal of Education only accepts papers written in correct and fluent English ata high academic standard. Any use of another language (whether in the paper or the referencelist) requires the inclusion of an English translation.
The style of expression must serve to articulate the complex ideas and concepts being presented,
conveying explicit, coherent, unambiguous meaning to scholarly readers. Moreover,manuscripts must have a formal tone and quality, employing third-person rather than firstperson standpoint (when feasible), placing emphasis on the research and not on unsubstantiatedsubjective impressions.
Contributors whose command of English is not at the level outlined above are responsible forhaving their manuscript corrected by a native-level, English-speaking academic prior to
submitting their paper for publication.
5. Literature Reviews
Any paper should have reference to the corpus of scholarly literature on the topic. A review ofthe literature should:
•
•
•
•
•

Predominantly be about contemporary literature (the last 5 years) unless you are
discussing a seminal piece of work.
Make explicit international connections for relevant ideas.
Analyse published papers in the related field rather than describe them.
Outline the gaps in the literature.
Highlight your contribution to the field.

Referencing
Referencing is the main way to avoid allegations of plagiarism. The IAFOR Journal of
Education uses the APA referencing style for both in-text citations and the reference list. If
you are unsure of the correct use of APA please use the Purdue Online Writing Lab (Purdue
OWL), – https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/ – which has excellent examples
of all forms of APA referencing. Please note APA is used for referencing not for the generalformat of the paper. Your reference list should be alphabetical by author surname and include
DOIs whenever possible.
This short guide to getting published should assist you to move beyond the first editorial review.
Failure to follow the guidelines will result in your paper being immediately rejected.
Good luck in your publishing endeavours,
Dr Yvonne Masters
Editor-in-Chief, IAFOR Journal of Education

Table of Contents
Forword
Yvonne Masters

1

Notes on Contributors

2

The Impact of Faculty Experience with Emergency Remote Teaching:
An Interpretive Phenomenological Study
Maha Al-Freih

7

Teaching Future Educators During a Global Pandemic
Jacquelynne Anne Boivin
Kathryn Welby

25

An Educator’s Response to COVID-19: Preservice Teachers’ Perspectives
on Flipped Distance Education
Osman Çil37

Why Graded Assessment for Undergraduates During the COVID-19
Lockdown: An Experience Introspection
Abdullatif AlshamsiAlex Zahavich
Samar El-Farra

55

Teaching Practice Online: Challenges in Japan, India and Kenya
Under Pandemic
Per-Olof Hansson

77

Motivating Online Learning through Project-Based Learning During the2020 COVID-19 Pandemic
Avneet Hira
Emma Anderson

93

Distance Teaching Practicum: Its Impact on Pre-Service EFL Teachers’
Preparedness for Teaching
Gülten Koşar

111

Teacher Professional Learning Whilst in Quarantine: A Case Study
from China
Kevin Laws
Feng Xun

127

Using a Design Thinking Approach for an Asynchronous Learning
Platform during COVID-19
Lori SeverinoMark Petrovich
Samantha Mercanti-AnthonySamuel Fischer

145

Emergency Response in Educational Policies during COVID-19
in Nepal: A Critical Review
Sagun Shrestha
Laxman Gnawali

163

Online University Teaching at the time of COVID-19 (2020):
An Australian Perspective
Erika K. Smith
Ece Kaya

183

Reviewers

201

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Foreword(Musings from the Editor-in-Chief)
When we first decided to run with a special issue on educational responses to COVID-19, little
did we know that we would still be in the midst of lockdowns, emerging variants, and scaryrising statistics as we reach publication. We knew that it would take time to return to some kindof normal, but not that the “new normal” will probably be drastically different from what we
knew before well into the long term.
The disruption to education, and to life itself, has been on a global scale and no-one has beenleft untouched in some way or other. For educators it has meant embracing online learning at
an unprecedented rate, with institutions scrambling to put strategies in place to reach as many
students as possible. Many of the papers in this issue reflect the search for new strategies aswell as looking at how policy has rushed to keep ahead of the pandemic. Our authors comefrom countries at both ends of the spectrum: those who are amongst the hardest hit by thecoronavirus, and those who have felt the effects, but the massive scale lockdowns anddevastating death totals have mercifully passed them by. Researching and writing in the midstof a pandemic, they have found the time to pass on material of value for all. Our authors
represent educators from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, the United States,
Sweden, Japan, Ireland, Nepal and Australia. Their papers demonstrate the global dedication
to keeping education going.
In the following pages you will find papers on how faculty have coped with the pandemic, how
students have been engaged, how an institution dealt with final assessments and how earlychildhood centres conducted “virtual” professional development. There are also papers
discussing the effects of the pandemic for pre-service teachers, including professional
experience possibilities. One paper explores the policies adopted by a government faced withchanges to educational provision. The topics are wide ranging, but the enthusiasm to makethings work shines through.
This is the last issue that I will be editing personally as I have taken up the role of Executive
Editor of the IAFOR Journal of Education from the start of April. This will involve me morein developing ways to support greater understanding of how to publish and how to review,probably leading me back to my own roots: education. I would like to say at this moment that
I am heartened that so many have already trusted us to publish your work and I am sure theeditors of the various issues will continue to receive your hard work. My thanks to all those
who have decided to publish with us.
My thanks, as always, to the authors, the editors, the associate editors, the publications
manager, Nick Potts, and to all the reviewers for bringing this issue and all of our other issues
to you, the readers. They all continue to share their research, their words, their commitment
and hard work in what has been some of the most difficult times. I have felt supported by theway in which you all rally to the call.
Enjoy reading and above all, stay safe,
Yvonne Masters,
Editor-in-Chief

1

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Notes on Contributors
Article 1: The Impact of Faculty Experience with Emergency Remote Teaching: An
Interpretive Phenomenological StudyDr Maha Al-Freih is an Assistant Professor of Instructional Design & Technology at theCollege of Education at Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University (PNU) in Riyadh, Saudi
Arabia. She earned her PhD in Learning Technologies Design Research from George Mason
University, an MA in Teaching and Learning with Technology from Santa Clara University,
and BS in Computer Science from King Saud University. She has previously served as the Vice
Dean of Learning and Teaching at the College of Business Administration at PNU and iscurrently a senior consultant at the National eLearning Center (NeLC). Her primary researchinterests include Ethics of Care in Online Learning, Learners’ Engagement and Persistence in
Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), Self-Regulated Learning (SRL), and Design-Based
Research (DBR).
Email: Maha.Alfreih@gmail.com
Article 2: Teaching Future Educators During a Global Pandemic
Dr Jacquelynne Boivin is an Assistant Professor of Elementary and Early Childhood
Education at Bridgewater State University. She supervises student teachers in the field andteaches courses in education-preparation. She is a former elementary school teacher and she
uses her past experiences in the field to contextualize her instruction in teacher-preparation.
Her research specialization is in multicultural education and anti-racist pedagogy. She is theauthor of the book, Exploring the Role of the School Principal in Predominantly White Middle
Schools: School Leadership to Promote Multicultural Understanding which highlights an
explanatory sequential mixed method study she conducted in order to earn her PhD in
Educational Leadership.
Email: jboivin@bridgew.edu
Dr Kathryn Welby is the director of teacher preparation and assistant professor of practice at
Merrimack College. She teaches a wide variety of special education courses. Kathryn
Welby has an extensive background in presenting research and professional development
nationally for teachers, administrators, and scholars. She holds Massachusetts licensures as aSpecial Education Administrator, Principal, Moderate Disabilities Teacher, and Elementary
Education Teacher and brings years of practitioner experience to her work. Kathrtyn Welby
has a book, Remote Strategies for Children with IEPs: An Educators Guidebook scheduled tobe released in May 2021.
Email: welbyk@merrimack.edu
Article 3: An Educator’s Response to COVID-19: Preservice Teachers’ Perspectives on
Flipped Distance Education
Dr Osman Çil is an assistant professor in the Department of Primary Education in Kırşehir
Ahi Evran University. He earned his MS and PhD degrees in Teaching and Curriculum at
Syracuse University. His research interests include pre-service teacher education, mathematics
education, innovative mathematics teaching approaches, and implementation of clinicalsimulations in educational settings.
Email: ocil@ahievran.edu.tr

2

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Article 4: Why Graded Assessment for Undergraduates During the COVID-19
Lockdown? An Experience Introspection
Dr Abdullatif AlShamsi is the President and CEO of the Higher Colleges of Technology,
United Arab Emirates, and is the first Emirati Principal Fellow of Advance Higher Education(PFHEA), UK. He received his PhD in Engineering from Duke University (USA). Throughout
his career, he has held senior management and academic positions, including Managing
Director of the Institute of Applied Technology and the roles of Assistant Professor, andAssistant Vice Chancellor for Research at the UAE University. He has published over 35
research publications in scientiﬁc journals and at international conferences, in engineering,educational management and transformational change. He has published a series of Arabic
books, entitled: “The Making of Education: Welcome to iPad Generation”. His researchinterests include materials science and engineering, fluid mechanics, change and educational
management, technology integration, adaptation of disruptive educational methods and hybrid
education models.
Email: ceo@hct.ac.ae
Samar El-Farra is the manager of academic assessment office at the Higher Colleges ofTechnology (HCT), United Arab Emirates, and senior fellow of Advance Higher Education(SFHEA)-UK. She was lecturer and program chair of medical imaging at the HCT. Samarholds a MSc in medical imaging (CSU)-Australia, she is a member of the College of Medical
Radiation and Imaging Technologists of Ontario- Canada. She is a founding board member ofthe Radiographers Society of Emirates (RASE) and RASE spokesperson at the International
Society of Radiographers and Radiological Technologists (ISRRT). She has conducted
research and presented in international conferences on diagnostic efficacy of Computed
Tomography in renal transplantation, trauma imaging, mammography, radiation patient safety
and advocacy, artificial intelligence for radiographers, higher education assessment, academic
integrity, and micro-credentials. Samar El-Farra’s current research interests include assessment
and academic integrity, higher education strategies, diagnostic efficacy, artificial intelligencefor radiographers.
Email: selfarra@hct.ac.ae
Dr Alex Zahavich is the chief academic officer (CAO) for the Higher Colleges of Technology(HCT), the UAE’s leading applied education institution, and founder of the global applied
education network (GAEN). He is responsible for implementing HCT 4.0, including thedelivery of HCT’s academic programs, and applied research and entrepreneurship activities
across the UAE. He was the vice president of corporate development, applied research, andinternational activity at the southern Alberta institute of technology (SAIT), Calgary, Alberta
where he was responsible for international projects, international students and SAIT’s firstglobal strategy. He was the founding director of SAIT’s Applied Research and Innovation
Services, focused on meeting industry’s needs, leading to SAIT becoming the number one
ranked college in Canada for applied research in 2013. He has a PhD in MechanicalEngineering. He has presented numerous papers on various topics including materials, sports
engineering, innovation, designed experiments, and entrepreneurship.
Email: azahavich@hct.ac.ae

3

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Article 5: Teaching Practice Online: Challenges in Japan, India and Kenya Under
Pandemic
Dr Per-Olof Hansson is a senior lecturer at the Department of Education, Linköping
University, Sweden. Per-Olof holds a PhD in Educational Research. He is a teacher educator
at undergraduate to master level in Social Science and arranges field studies in Eastern Africa
and Asia for teacher trainees. Per-Olof has been an exchange lecturer at the University of
Nairobi. His research interests include mobile learning, online teaching methods, simulationteaching, and health literacy. He is also a researcher at the Athletic Research Center at
Linköping University.
Email: per-olof.hansson@liu.se
Article 6: Motivating Online Learning through Project-Based Learning During the 2020
COVID-19 Pandemic
Dr Avneet Hira is an Assistant Professor of Engineering at Boston College, where she
researches educational technology, design, and engineering epistemology for equitable STEM
education. She received her PhD in Engineering Education and MS in Aerospace Engineeringfrom Purdue University, and BE in Aeronautical Engineering from Punjab Engineering
College.
Email: avneet.hira@bc.edu
Dr Emma Anderson has a PhD from the University of Pennsylvania’s Graduate School of
Education. She holds an MA from the University of Buffalo in Geology and an BA from Smith
College in Sociology-Anthropology. Her research centers around science, art, making, andplay.
Email: eanderso@mit.edu
Article 7: Distance Teaching Practicum: Its Impact on Pre-Service EFL Teachers’
Preparedness for Teaching
Dr. Gülten KOŞAR earned a PhD in English Language Teaching from Çukurova University.
She is an Assistant Professor of English Language Teaching at Hatay Mustafa Kemal
University. Her research concentrations include second/foreign language learning, teaching
language skills, pragmatics, English language teacher education and last but not least teaching
English to adult learners.
Email: gulten.kosar@mku.edu.tr
Article 8: Teacher Professional Learning Whilst in Quarantine: A Case Study fromChina
Dr Kevin Laws (EdD) is an Honorary Senior Lecturer at the University of Sydney. He is the
director of a network which supports the professional learning of lecturers from Thai,
Vietnamese, Malaysian, Indonesian and Chinese universities. His research interests include
educational leadership and management.
Email: kevin.laws@sydney.edu.au4

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Dr Feng Xun, after completing her PhD at the University of Sydney, returned to China andestablished two early childhood education centres in Shandong Province. She is the Directorof both centres and is especially interested in issues related to the shortage of early childhood
teachers and problems associated with the teachers’ undereducation.
Email: feng.xun@alumni.sydney.edu.au
Article 9: Using a Design Thinking Approach for an Asynchronous Learning Platform
during COVID-19
Dr Lori Severino is an Assistant Professor of Special Education in the School of Education at
Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. She received her doctorate from Neumann
University, USA in 2011. Following a twenty-six year career in public school teaching, shebegan her work in post-secondary education. Her research interests include dyslexia, early
literacy skill development, and reading comprehension assessment. These interests focus on
improving teacher preparation. Her research has been published locally and internationally.
Email: las492@drexel.edu
Mark Petrovich Jr. is a PhD candidate and research assistant in Drexel University’s Schoolof Education. He holds a master’s degree in Digital Media and has over a decade of experience
as a designer/developer for interactive experiences. Mark continues to integrate his prior design
and technology experiences into his research to investigate how individuals learn with and fromimmersive technologies such as virtual and augmented reality. His broad research interests
include educational technology, game-based learning, informal learning, identity exploration,and the learning sciences.
Email: mep64@drexel.edu
Dr Samantha Mercanti-Anthony is the Director for Online Learning in the School of
Education at Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. She received her doctorate from
Drexel University, USA in 2014. Her research interests include engagement within online andhybrid learning environments and effective constructivist learning practices in online andhybrid learning environments.
Email: sm853@drexel.edu
Mr Samuel Fischer is a Data and Evaluation Manager for the Read by 4th Campagin at theFree Library of Philadelphia Foundation, Philadelphia, PA, USA. He received his bachelors inMathematics from Whitman College, USA, in 2015. Following two years of service as a City
Year Philadelphia corps member and SERVE Philly AmeriCorps VISTA, he joined the Readby 4th team at the Free Library Foundation. His professional interests include empowerment
evaluation, participatory research methods, and approaches to evaluating systems change andcollective impact.
Email: fischers@freelibrary.org

5Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Article 10: Emergency Response in Educational Policies during Covid-19 in Nepal: A
Critical Review
Mr Sagun Shrestha is a PhD student in the School of Applied Language and Intercultural
Studies (SALIS), Dublin City University exploring the affordances and challenges of using
ICT in secondary schools. He has an MA in English Language Teaching and a Master's inEnglish Education from Tribhuvan University, Nepal. Currently, he is serving as a jointcoordinator of Irish Association for Applied Linguistics Postgraduate Students Special Interest
Group. He is interested in ICT in education, teacher education, language planning and policy,
and discourse analysis.
Email: sagun.shrestha2@mail.dcu.ie
Prof. Laxman Gnawali initially taught English at primary, secondary and tertiary levels inrural and urban parts of Nepal. After his second Masters in Teacher Training for ELT at the
University of Exeter, UK as a Hornby Scholar, he moved to teacher education and training.
Currently, he leads the English language teacher education programmes at Kathmandu
University, Nepal. He played a key role in integrating ICT and digital technologies and setting
up an online mode of delivery of the teacher education programmes. His publication areas andresearch interests include language pedagogy, action research, teacher professional
networking, and ICT integration among others. He currently serves Nepal English Language
Teachers’ Association as its Senior Vice President.
Email: lgnawali@kusoed.edu.np
Article 11: Online University Teaching at the time of COVID-19 (2020): an Australian
Perspective
Dr Erika K. Smith holds a PhD in sociology from the Institute for Culture and Society,
Western Sydney University. She is an Early Career Academic, teaching in the School of
Education and School of Social Sciences at Western Sydney University, Australia. Her
research interests include Australian politics and nationalism, diversity, social justiceeducation, education policy, and casual academic teaching staff in the higher education sector.
Email: e.smith@westernsydney.edu.au
Dr Ece Kaya holds a PhD in Heritage and Tourism Studies and is an Education Focused
Lecturer with an interdisciplinary background. She has been teaching and researching in thefields of heritage and tourism, urban planning and management. Her research interests involve
digital applications in teaching and learning practices, placemaking and creative space, andrevitalisation of industrial spaces.
Email: ece.kaya@uts.edu.au6

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

The Impact of Faculty Experience with Emergency Remote Teaching: An
Interpretive Phenomenological Study
Maha Al-Freih
Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University
Saudi Arabia

7

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Abstract
The aim of this phenomenological study is to provide a deeper understanding of the impact of
remote teaching on instructors’ perceptions of online learning and future teaching practices
amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Interpretative phenomenological analysis was used to analyze
open-ended semi-structured interviews conducted with five higher education faculty in Saudi
Arabia. Three major themes were identified: enhancing student engagement; increased
awareness of technology affordances and constraints; and moving from emergency remoteteaching to technology-enhanced and blended learning. Participants of this study were mainly
concerned about finding ways to support active student engagement in this new learning
environment, which in turn increased their awareness of the educational affordances andconstraints of online learning and technologies. Participants’ deeper understanding of thepotential of online technologies in supporting student learning, as well as their own andstudents’ increased familiarity and comfort with online learning and technologies, served as
the main drivers for potential future implementation of blended learning and technologyenhanced teaching practices. With that said, participants were still apprehensive aboutengaging in fully online teaching, arguing that blended strategies and enhanced-technology
integration are more likely to overcome some of the limitations of face-to-face teaching andimprove the overall learning experience for their students. Discussion of these findings inrelation to the extant literature and their implications for higher education institutions moving
forward are provided.
Keywords: COVID-19, emergency remote teaching, faculty professional development,
faculty support, online teaching8Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

The global spread of the coronavirus has impacted – and continues to impact – many aspectsof human life, including education. Higher education institutions around the world responded
by pivoting to distance and online education to reduce or eliminate in-person classes,
significantly disrupting the education of what is estimated to be over 220 million postsecondary students, or 13% of the global student body (World Bank, 2020). In Saudi Arabia,
higher education institutions faced numerous challenges in their sudden move to remoteteaching, as was the case for the majority of institutions around the world. The change to remoteeducation occurred overnight – literally in many cases – placing an enormous pressure on
institutions due to the lack of time normally required to design and develop pedagogicallysound online courses and the absence of support structures that can accommodate institutionwide adoption of online and distance education. This has led many to argue that the emergency
plans put in place to mitigate the impact of the pandemic cannot be considered true online
learning, but constitute rather a mere shift in delivery method that allows students access tolearning solutions that would normally be delivered face-to-face (f2f). Consequently, the term
emergency remote teaching (ERT) will be used throughout this paper in reference to teaching
and learning practices implemented during the coronavirus pandemic (Bozkurt et al., 2020;
Hodges et al., 2020).
In light of the unique circumstances driving this change, this shift has created many newexperiences for higher education faculty. It has forced many, who would otherwise hesitate tointegrate learning technologies or adopt online teaching practices, to utilize online-learning
platforms and tools. Even those educators who are already comfortable and familiar with online
learning technologies and practices have had to rethink their course design and use online
learning tools and platforms in new ways to accommodate a fully online delivery method(Johnson et al., 2020). The unique context and conditions under which this shift to ERT
happened have raised some concerns about the impact of this experience on teaching faculty,
calling for the need to examine the “social constructions and meaning-making of various
stakeholders” (Kerres, 2020, p. 4) during ERT and its impact on faculty perceptions about
online learning and future teaching practices (Cutri & Mena, 2020; Kearns, 2016; Kerres,2020).
It is with this purpose in mind, and within this unique context, that this study is conducted. The
purpose of this interpretive phenomenological inquiry is to capitalize on these new experiencesby unpacking higher education faculty members’ experiences during the mandated shift to
ERT, and to explore how these experiences might have shaped and/or reshaped their attitudes
toward online learning and the impact this could have on their future teaching practices. An
examination of such experiences will help institutions and administration understand thetechnological pedagogical challenges and practices that have emerged during this period, andinstructors’ motivations and plans regarding possible future pedagogical changes anddirections. These insights, in turn, can guide institutions in shaping effective support systems
and structures aligned with faculty experiences and needs to support more innovative andeffective use of learning technologies and online teaching practices in the future (Johnson etal., 2020; Kearns, 2016). The topic of inquiry that guided this study was:•What was the impact of the ERT experience on higher education faculty, in terms of
their perceptions and potential future adoption of online teaching practices?

9

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Literature Review
The Online Teaching Experience
Online teaching is a complex process requiring a change to the traditional roles of instructors
and a shift in their beliefs, pedagogical thinking, and teaching practices (Ferrario et al., 2013;
Jääskelä et al., 2017; Marzilli et al., 2014; Sinacori, 2020). Bawane and Spector (2009)
identified eight different roles or competencies that online teaching faculty need to be effective
online instructors: pedagogical, professional, evaluator, social, technologist, administrator,
researcher, and advisor counselor. This shift in traditional roles and normal practices can posesome challenges for faculty. For instance, faculty members who are teaching online experiencea time burden due to the intensive work needed to prepare and facilitate online learning, whichcomes at the expense of their other academic and scholarly responsibilities and institutional
expectations (Cutri & Mena, 2020; Marzilli et al., 2014; Rogers et al., 2018). A lack ofresources and proper institutional support through effective professional development andpolicies that enable quality online teaching practices has also been identified as a greatchallenge for faculty teaching online and can negatively impact their satisfaction in doing so(Al-Zahrani, 2015; Sinacori, 2020; Wingo et al., 2017). The shift in their traditional roles andpractices can lead to intense emotional reactions and anxiety among faculty resulting from asense of identity disruption and professional vulnerability, such as concerns about tenure,promotion, and professional image (Cutri & Mena, 2020; Wingo et al., 2017). That said, studies
have found that once faculty begin to engage in online teaching, they appreciate the unique
opportunities it affords, such as its flexibility in expanding learning opportunities for theirstudents and providing the space to support more individualized learning experiences.
However, faculty who are new or have limited experience with online teaching tend to preferhybrid and blended formats over fully online courses. This preference is mainly due to concerns
about the loss of humanistic values and interaction as well as students’ ability to engage
effectively in this new learning space, concerns that seem to subside as faculty gain moreexperience teaching online (Jääskelä et al., 2017; Marzilli et al., 2014; Mejia & Phelan, 2014;
Rogers et al., 2018; Walters et al., 2017; Wingo et al., 2017).
A few studies have investigated faculty experiences and reactions during the rapid transition to
ERT in the spring of 2020 (for example, Haslam et al., 2020; Johnson et al., 2020). These
investigations reveal that most instructors, with and without prior online teaching experience,
had to adjust their course requirements, teaching methods, and learning activities. Due to thescale and urgency of this transition, many relied on self-help and collegial support, raising someconcerns about the sustainability of these plans in the face of an ongoing pandemic and thepossible impact of this shift in support structure and roles on faculty perceptions and attitudes
toward online teaching (Johnson et al., 2020; Kerres, 2020).
The Impact of Teaching Online on Faculty Beliefs and Teaching Practices
A number of studies have examined the impact of teaching online on faculty beliefs, attitudes,
and teaching practices surrounding technology, across different modalities and settings(Jääskelä et al., 2016; Kearns, 2016; Scott, 2016; Wingo et al., 2017). Consistent with otherresearch (for example, Walters et al., 2017), Wingo et al. (2017) found that as faculty
experience with online teaching increased, so did their satisfaction with the experience, theirintention to continue to teach online, and their positive perception of its ability to support
student learning.
Both learning to teach online (Foulger et al., 2019; McQuiggan, 2012) and actually teaching
online (Kearns, 2016; Scott, 2016; Sinacori, 2020) require a shift in pedagogical thinking and

10

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

practice, thus providing the impetus for instructors to critically reexamine their assumptions
and beliefs about teaching and learning. One impact that has been noted in the literature is a
shift from teaching-centered to more student-centered practices (Kearns, 2016; McQuiggan,
2012; Scott, 2016). In a phenomenological study aimed at understanding the experience ofchanging one’s f2f teaching practices and assumptions as a result of teaching online, Kearns(2016) found that as faculty engaged in converting their course materials and activities to fit
the online medium, they became more critical and deliberate in their thinking about how
students learn. As a result, faculty became more explicit in the structure and organization of
their f2f classes, redesigned their f2f courses by incorporating online asynchronous activities
to maximize the value of f2f time with their students, and integrated technology tools to support
active learning and enhance peer and instructor interactions. Scott (2016) highlights the criticalrole that online teaching itself has on change in faculty beliefs and practice, especially when
student online learning preferences and experience clash with faculty expectations.
The conditions surrounding the mandated shift to ERT due to global health concerns provide a
different teaching context compared to those studies that have been conducted in nonemergency situations (Kearns, 2016; Kerres, 2020). Further, most of the studies conducted on
faculty experience during ERT so far are mostly large-scale studies aimed at uncovering
general patterns of faculty practices during ERT. The present study adds to the growing bodyof research on ERT by examining the potential impact this experience might have on faculty’s
attitudes about online teaching and future teaching practices through the lens of interpretive
phenomenological analysis (IPA).
Methods
IPA’s phenomenological, ideographic, and hermeneutic principles provide an appropriate lensthrough which to examine unique and complex experiences such as faculty’s shift to andimplementation of ERT, and the impact this experience could have on their perceptions about
online teaching and their future teaching practices (Noon, 2018; Smith, 2004, 2011). Thisapproach to research is phenomenological in that it aims to uncover individual perceptions andviews of an event or object under investigation (Smith & Osborn, 2008). Deep and intensive
exploration of individual experiences, and the researcher’s active role in interpreting themeaning participants assign to those experiences, are central to IPA, highlighting its
ideographic and hermeneutic nature (Noon, 2018; Pietkiewicz & Smith, 2014; Smith, 2011).
Due to IPA’s focus on individual perceptions and sense-making, Smith and Osborn (2008)
recommend the use of non-directive, semi-structured interviews as the main data-collection
method, to allow for additional probing based on participants’ responses. A flexible interview
protocol was used, and additional probing questions were asked during interviews to allow fora deeper exploration of participants’ experiences and perceptions of teaching remotely (Noon,
2018; Smith & Osborn, 2008). Typical interview prompts included “What were the main
challenges you faced when teaching remotely?”, “What technology tools did you use in yourcourse? Why did you choose those tools?”, and “Will you continue to use these tools in the
future and why?”.
Sampling and Participants
Convenience and networking sampling was used to identify and recruit participants for thisstudy. A total of five female participants (see Table 1) from three different higher education
institutions in Saudi Arabia agreed to be interviewed. Smaller, homogeneous samples arecommonly utilized in IPA due to its idiographic nature, which requires intense, immersive, and11

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

deep exploration of individual cases that hold relevance and personal significance toparticipants. Thus, five female participants were deemed sufficient for this study (Noon, 2018;
Smith, 2011; Smith and Osborn, 2003). All participants had experience using a learning
management system to support their f2f teaching prior to the pandemic, but only one participant
had previous experience teaching fully online courses.
Table 1. The participants
Pseudonyms Age
Julie
Nora

39
36

Helen
Sarah
Susan

52
+40
40

Current positionYears
teaching
Associate Professor of Law
18
Associate Professor of Management Information 8
Systems
Assistant Professor of International Marketing
15
Assistant Professor of Law
9Assistant Professor of Finance
17

Data Analysis
The analytical process for this study followed that described by Noon (2018). The process
began with reading each interview transcript in its entirety to obtain a general sense of eachparticipant’s account. Transcripts and initial notes were then reread, and comprehensive
annotations, reflections, and interpretations were made regarding interesting quotes, which wasorganized into tables to sustain alignment between analysis and raw data/evidence. Codes andemergent themes were then identified based on the extensive annotations performed in theprevious step. These initial themes were defined and tentatively organized according toconceptual similarities to establish their interrelations.
The preceding steps were repeated for each interview case. Once emergent themes for eachsubsequent case were identified, previous themes were reviewed in relation to the annotationand quotes from which they emerged and either dropped, if the themes did not appear in at least
three of the five cases, or amended (Smith, 2011). This flexible iterative process ensured abalance between the collective/shared themes and the distinctive voice/experience of eachindividual. The final step in this process was writing up the results of the analysis. In IPA
research, write-up is an extension of the IPA analytical process. Due to the interpretive flair of
IPA, themes emerging from analysis are not only thematically described, but also accompaniedby the researcher’s narrative interpretation in relation to the extant literature. According toNoon (2018), this can be done either concurrently in a combined ‘results and discussion’section, or in separate ‘results’ and ‘discussion’ sections. The latter presentation style wasfollowed here. Following Smith’s (2011) recommendation for validity and rigor in IPA
research presentation, extracts that highlight convergence and divergence across cases from atleast three participants are presented in the discussion of each theme.
Research Procedures
After securing Institutional Review Board approval for this research, the researcher recruited
higher education faculty by email and asked for network referrals of other potential
participants. Faculty were invited via email to participate in one-hour semi-structured virtualinterviews to explore their ERT experience. The email recruitment message explained the
purpose of the current study and the procedures being followed, and included an online consent
page for participants to indicate their consent to participate and their right to withdraw fromthe study at any time. Three interviews were conducted virtually using Zoom, an online

12

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

synchronous communication platform, and two were conducted via email due to technical or
personal issues related to participants. Email responses and Zoom interview transcriptions
served as the raw data in this study. Email interviews were conducted in two phases, in whichinterview questions were sent to participants and their answers were returned, followed byprobing questions from the researcher for clarifications or to elicit richer responses to support
a deeper exploration of the personal experiences being discussed (Smith, 2004).
Results
The analysis highlighted three common themes: enhancing student online engagement;
increased awareness of technology affordances and constraints; and moving from ERT totechnology-enhanced and blended learning. In this section, these themes are explored andsupported with representative quotations from faculty interviews.
Enhancing Student Online Engagement
A common challenge among all participants was ensuring students’ active engagement with
instructor, peers, and course material. All participants discussed ways in which they tailoredactivities/assignments and teaching strategies to encourage student engagement in this newlearning environment. Take Helen for example,
The main issue faced in moving online was developing a medium that allowed
students to talk between themselves, as they would in a class, and not for allcommunication to be lecturer to student, but also that we managed to succeed
in facilitating student-to-student communication as well.
When first required to shift online, Nora continued to implement her existing f2f plans with nochanges; however, she noticed a decrease in student engagement and interaction. Within a weekof the shift to ERT she realized that she could not simply map the three hours she normallyprovides in class to the virtual space because it is a completely different environment. She
recognized that online environments requires different types of incentives for students toparticipate and engage with peers and course material. As a result, she worked on changing
some of the learning material and pedagogical use of technology tools, such as discussion
boards, to increase student engagement with course topics. For instance, instead of using thediscussion board for discussions and debates as she did prior to the pandemic, she began to use
it for student reflection to encourage a deeper cognitive engagement.
Helen, Susan, Nora, and Sara discussed their students’ preference for text-based interaction
versus audio/video during live sessions. For Helen, this preference was a challenge. She
explained, the ‘teaching’ was challenging, at least to me; I like to see the whites of students’eyes. Similarly, when Susan was asked about the most challenging aspect of remote teaching,
she replied, The inability to understand the extent of student understanding. When repeatedly
asked, ‘Is anything unclear?’ very few students used to respond. Susan found it difficult toassess student understanding of topics discussed during live sessions due to students’
reluctance to ask questions, compounded by the lack of eye contact that would allow her togauge students’ reactions and facial expression. So, instead of asking students if they had anyquestions, she began by asking course-related questions throughout the live sessions andencouraged students to respond via the chat facility, a strategy she found to be very effective
as the chat facility was very active in all my classes.

13Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

For Nora, the lack of student video and audio communication was an indication of students’lack of engagement rather than her personal/teaching preference. She described the difficulties
she faced as she tried to engage her students with a guest speaker during one of her live
sessions:
Out of 32 students, only one student interacted with her during the one-hoursessions that we held. We asked the students to open their videos to interact
with her, but all the students, all 31, preferred to have their videos off andsaid, “We will interact through text,” which is not enough.
On the other hand, Nora did not seem to mind students’ passive participation in virtual officehours. As a matter of fact, she recognized the learning benefits this type of engagement
provided to her students. She said, Some of the students, they just came to listen. They didn’t
ask any questions, but they were learning from other students’ questions. I think that is
excellent. She elaborated on this, saying,
Normally, not many students take advantage of my office hours. They rushgoing out to their houses or their part-time jobs or other commitments they
have, especially [since] my office hours are fixed at the university. I will keep
the fixed office hours, but I will add virtual office hours to my future classes.
Sara recognized students’ preference for text-based interaction and communication, and evenwent so far as to accommodate them by adjusting course activities and requirements. She
explained,
Before COVID-19, students’ debates were planned for the international law
course since they are very good in realizing the CLO [Course Learning
Outcomes] relevant to students being able to formulate legal arguments andperform public litigations and legal debates. However, a number of students
were not in favor of having themselves speaking loudly in the Blackboard
environment. Therefore, I took the students’ circumstances into consideration
and I decided to change the format to written debates. I reformulated theassessment rubric and had every two students coupled in a group and asked
them to submit their written discussion.
Increased Awareness of Technology Affordances and Constraints
Participants’ awareness of online learning and technology affordances and constraints
increased due to their concerns about students’ active engagement online. Even thoughparticipants are not new to technology and have always used an learning management system
to support their f2f teaching, their complete reliance on technology during the pandemic has
pushed them to experiment and think more critically about the pedagogical opportunities andlimitations present in different technologies that they may have not considered or recognizedprior to the mandated pivot to ERT. Nora shifted some of her course activities to Slack, a teamcommunication app. She explained her decision: I used Slack because it’s a good environment
for communication with my students, because communication through Blackboard was mainly
one-way communication with no interaction, such as emails for instance. I found that Slacksupports better communication and discussions. She went on to describe some of the featuresthat she found particularly helpful in supporting her students’ engagement and learning:
In collaborating and communicating with the students, I found Slack to beamazing. All students were involved in these discussions, so I like it as a

14

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

communication tool. I also used it to send my students video tutorials or
articles related to their course topics, and some students as well were sharing
back resources. I was able to create a dynamic interactive environment withstudents and engage them in discussions related to what is important in theirfield.
Sara found supporting interactive learning for a large cohort of students online to bechallenging. Even though she had not found a clear solution to this problem at the time of theinterview, she was cognizant of the differences between f2f and online as learning
environments and the need to adjust teaching strategies to take full advantage of theopportunities provided when teaching online: My F2F lectures are usually very interactive;
however, from my recent experience with remote learning, I now understand that online
interactive strategies don’t work with a big number of students. I’m exploring possible
alternative teaching strategies in this respect.
Julie, who has previous experience teaching fully online courses, took advantage of theflexibility of online learning in supporting self-directed individualized learning paths forstudents. She noted that there are open-access resources available online that she included as
extra reading to support student learning about course topics prior to the pandemic, but that it
was quite sparse at that stage because we were doing so much in the class, I was only uploading
certain things. I wasn’t overloading them. This changed as classes shifted online. She did notneed to use the full three hours of in-class teaching; instead, she increased the number of openaccess resources with different perspectives on course topics and encouraged her students to
explore. She said,
I was able to give my students examples and scenarios through Moodle andthrough the online delivery that I would never have got to cover within theclassroom, ever. It was up to the students, as they went through, to kind ofalign themselves to whichever perspective suited their standpoint the best.
Moving from ERT to Technology-Enhanced and Blended Learning
A commonly mentioned theme among participants that their ERT experience has served as acatalyst for future changes to their teaching practices and course design. The mandated shift toremote teaching forced faculty to experiment with technology and try to find solutions to their
immediate problems, which in turn enhanced their awareness of the potential of learningtechnologies in overcoming some of the limitations of traditional teaching. Take Nora forexample,I believe in technology, but this experience has changed me a lot. One of thethings I realized is why not use it for my office hours, why not use it for
student reflections on some exams, especially after final exams because we
don’t have a class after that. I can use it to support students when they needit.
In addition to participants’ increased awareness of the affordances of online technologies, theirincreased familiarity and newfound confidence in their ability to learn and use technology as aresult of their ERT experience was also a strong motivator for them to integrate technology
tools and incorporate blended learning opportunities in the future. For instance, Susan
described how her perception about her ability to utilize technology tools in her courses

15

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

changed, I thought it will be difficult for me to learn, understand, and use them, but it was agreat experience and I understood how challenges could be changed into opportunities.
That being said, participants were still apprehensive about engaging in fully online teaching,arguing that blended strategies and enhanced-technology integration are more likely to
overcome the challenges and limitations associated with f2f teaching. This led to the emergenceof the subtheme perceived barriers to fully online teaching. Two main factors were discussed
by participants as a justification for their preference for technology-enhanced and blended
learning strategies over fully online teaching: their concern about the loss of social andemotional connections with students; and students’ lack of technical and online learning skills.
Helen passionately expressed her concerns saying,
Truly believe that for the full educational experience students need the face
to face experience – with teaching staff – support staff and with each other –people are social creatures and having the discipline – structure and thesocial interaction helps enhance the educational experience. If there are
medical – personal – or operational situations that make physical presencedifficult – then technology can be used to enhance but really do not believe
either for the teaching staff or for the students that technology is the answer– face to face classes are dynamic live entities – teaching staff need to beable to adapt to the requirements of the class – this is almost impossible to
do 100% using technology – it is more feasible in the blended model ofteaching and learning.
Four of the five participants discussed the difficulties associated with student readiness foronline learning even prior to the pandemic, which posed serious challenges during the initial
shift to ERT. Susan noted student reluctance to reach out with questions or clarifications andrather try to handle everything themselves, and discussed the importance of students’ ability to
self-assess and take the initiative in reaching out for help when needed, especially in online
courses:
I discussed with students the challenges and limitations of online learning,
and that a meaningful outcome from each session is possible only when theytake full responsibility of attending the class, being attentive, and reachingout when having doubts or difficulties via chat or via email.
For Sara, these challenges were multifaceted. She explained that many students did not havethe required technical experience at the beginning, did not understand the requirements andbasic concepts of remote learning, and thought of it as a chance to gain undeserved grades.
This did not come a surprise to her, as she has always faced difficulties with students’ inertia
and resistance to online learning. However, for her and for other participants in this study,
these challenges seemed to subside as students became more familiar with online learning tools
and requirements, which they described as being a strong motivator for them to build on thismomentum and engage students in more blended learning opportunities in the future. Sara said,
I will be more comfortable that students are familiar and experienced in many of the things
that I ask them to do or perform on Blackboard and technology platforms. This was not thecase before the remote learning experience.

16

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

As mentioned, participants discussions about the future changes they are considering revolved
around the integration of tools and blended strategies to address some of the challenges
associated with traditional teaching such as lecture capture and virtual support that allow
student access to course material and support anytime, anywhere; online assessment andblended teaching/learning strategies to help faculty manage large class sections; and improved
access to online digital learning resources and material in different formats (i.e., audio/video)
to support individualized learning and to accommodate student preferences for written versus
audio and video material. It is interesting to note, however, that while participants were sharing
their ideas for how to adjust future teaching practices to take advantage of the opportunities
afforded by technology, they weren’t always sure about the specifics of how to implement them.
Nora said, for example,
I always have an issue with the number of students in my classes. Now I’msure I can find ways in which technology can provide solutions to large classsizes. I believe technology can support me to a certain level on how to support
my students in these large sections; I just need to think about it.
Similarly, Julie shared:
Google Meets, I hadn’t used before. I certainly haven’t used it before withstudents in a way that I have been. I think going forward, I definitely would
consider having a portion of my course online now, out of my contact hours.
So, whether that’s an hour a week or more than that, I need to think about it.
Discussion
The purpose of this inquiry was to examine the impact of the ERT experience on higher
education faculty, in terms of their perceptions and potential future adoption of online teachingpractices. The emergent themes and their interrelationships are presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Themes and interrelations

17

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Findings indicate that participants’ increased experience and familiarity with online learning –even if forced – has enhanced their attitudes and understanding about the potential of online
learning technologies to support student learning. All participants shared the challenges they
faced as they tried to support student online engagement and accommodate the variation in
their interaction preferences. These efforts, in turn, deepened their understanding of online
technologies and increased their sense of confidence in their ability to utilize these tools in theirteaching, both pedagogically and technically, not only in online courses, but also in their f2f
teaching. However, participants’ concerns about student readiness and the loss of social andemotional connections with their students in fully online courses seemed to mediate the impactof this experience on their future plans. They all shared a preference for technology-enhanced
and blended strategies, rather than fully online teaching, and shared their intention to adjust
their courses in ways that take advantage of the affordances of technology. These findings andtheir implications will be discussed in relation to the extant literature in the following section.
Key Findings
Consistent with the research conducted so far on faculty ERT experiences during thecoronavirus pandemic, participants in this study reported changes to their teaching strategies,
learning activities, and course material (Haslam et al., 2020; Johnson et al., 2020). Thesechanges were mainly implemented to support student engagement and interactions with peers,
instructor, and course material. Participants’ explicit attention to how students learn and theways in which learning activities and technologies can support students’ active engagement issimilar to the observations made by Kearns (2016), who found that instructors’ actual
experience teaching online can serve as the trigger needed to move toward more studentcentered practices.
In this study, participants referred to their f2f teaching experience as a way to make sense of
the pedagogical changes needed to support student learning, highlighting for them thedifferences and similarities between online and f2f teaching and increasing their awareness ofthe educational potential of online technologies in both online and f2f settings. As a result,participants described a number of ways in which they plan to redesign their courses and adjust
their teaching practices to take advantage of these technologies (Kearns, 2016). The patternsof thinking described here, derived from participants’ explicit discussion of their ERT
experience and its impact, highlight the intricate relationship between changes to instructors’
beliefs and practices, and the role of practical and experiential knowledge in driving instructor
pedagogical and curriculum decisions and beliefs (Jääskelä et al., 2017; Scott, 2016).
According to Scott (2016), “when teachers begin using elearning, they may need to elaborate
or change their elearning beliefs and practices” (p. 595). Scott (2016) describes a process ofchange that extends beyond initial online training and course design, one that is closelyintertwined with instructors’ day-to-day practice, especially as they engage in self-reflection
and social discourse with colleagues centered around curricular needs to find alternative
solutions to challenges and unmet expectations (see also Ferrario et al., 2013; Jääskelä et al.,2017).
Study participants indicated a preference for blended learning and an intention to adjust theircourses to include more technology tools in the future, rather than fully online teaching. Thiswas due to two main reasons: concerns over the lack of social and emotional connection withand among students, and the lack of student technical and learning skills needed to succeed infully online courses. These concerns are not unique to this sample, especially when we consider
participants’ limited experience with online teaching. Mejia and Phelan (2014) found thatfaculty with limited to no online teaching experience view blended learning as a less threating18

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

alternative to fully online courses. Moreover, participants’ concerns about student readinessfor fully online learning and the impact it could have on the quality of student learning arealigned with those reported in the literature (Jääskelä et al., 2017; Marzilli et al., 2014; Rogers
et al., 2018; Walters et al., 2017; Wingo et al., 2017). Participants in this study described a setof skills necessary for student success in online courses that extend beyond technical abilities,
such as students’ ability to effectively manage their effort and time or to seek help when theyneed it, skills that are consistent with the those exhibited by highly self-regulatory learners(Zimmerman, 2000). Several scholars have suggested that Self-Regulated Learning (SRL)
skills, that is learners’ ability to take an active role in their learning by employing specificlearning strategies to achieve their goals (Zimmerman, 2000), may be particularly importantfor students participating in online courses (Dabbagh & Kitsantas, 2004; Rowe & Rafferty,2013).
Practical Implications
Institutions seeking to expand their online course offerings and improve its quality should takeadvantage of faculty members’ recent experiences with ERT and build on its momentum. With
proper support built on an understanding of the incremental nature of change to instructors’
beliefs and practices, and the critical role that online teaching experience plays in shaping andreshaping teaching beliefs and practices, faculty skepticism about the effectiveness of fully
online learning could subside with their increased familiarity with online technology tools andconfidence in their ability to support effective student learning (Ferrario et al., 2013; Foulger
et al., 2019; Mejia & Phelan, 2014; Scott, 2016; Walters et al., 2017). This, however, requires
an expanded repertoire of faculty support strategies and new structures that enable embedded
on-the-job support and provides in-time guidance and feedback on practical day-to-day
challenges (Al-Zahrani, 2015; Foulger et al., 2019; Jääskelä et al., 2017; Mohr & Shelton,
2017; Walters et al., 2017). Moving away from scalable one-size-fit-all training and workshops
towards digitally-connected community spaces that allow for context-specific knowledge
sharing, dialogue, and collaboration among faculty teaching online, through mentoring or
faculty learning communities for instance, can enhance the visibility of contextually relevantpedagogical practices and expose instructors to alternative ideas and experiences that expand
their own pedagogical thinking (Jääskelä et al., 2017, Mohr & Shelton, 2017; Pacansky-Brock,2020; Scott, 2016; Walters et al., 2017). Further, this study highlighted the critical role that
instructors’ actual online teaching experience plays in shaping their beliefs and practices. Theseexperiences can be leveraged as assets during professional development efforts through oneon-one support and guided self-reflection activities for faculty teaching online. Personalized
support strategies allow faculty to form explicit connections between their experiences teaching
online and f2f and improve their practices across different modalities (Kearns, 2016; Scott,2016).
Administrators should also invest in supporting and preparing not only their faculty for online
courses, but also their students. Based on the experiences described in this study, concerns overstudent readiness for online learning and lack of SRL skills seemed to play a strong role inparticipants’ decisions and future plans for online and blended learning (Kebritchi, 2014;
Wingo et al., 2017). Simply providing prompts or reminders of effective SRL strategies is not
sufficient in promoting the positive effects that SRL has on learners’ engagement in online
courses. Rather, deliberate design and support for SRL must be integrated and embedded within
the online learning environment. Given faculty recent experience with online teaching,enhancing faculty understanding of SRL and how it can be supported through course design
and teaching practices is warranted (Dabbagh & Kitsantas, 2004; Rowe & Rafferty, 2013).
Further, institution wide orientation programs for students enrolling in online programs/courses

19Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

that address student technical skills as well as their online learning and regulation skills needed
to succeed in online courses can help students form realistic expectations of what effective
online learning entails, and reduce faculty concerns about teaching blended and fully online
courses (Liu, 2019).
Limitations and Suggestions for Further Research
The small sample size of this study could be considered a methodological limitation. However,the purpose of IPA studies is not to generate theory or provide general claims, but rather toprovide an in-depth, case-by-case analysis of the perceptions and meanings generated by asmall homogeneous group within their own contexts, which is why small sample sizes arecommonly used in IPA research (Noon, 2018; Pietkiewicz & Smith, 2014; Smith, 2011; Smith& Osborn, 2008).
This study examined the experience of five higher education faculty who were teaching
remotely during the coronavirus pandemic, and the influence this experience might have inshaping their attitudes toward online learning and their future teaching practices. Future
research should examine the experiences of faculty who are involved the implementation ofsuch changes and identify the conditions under which these planned changes are best supported
and enhanced (Kearns, 2016). This should include a nuanced examination of the impact ofdifferent types of embedded on-the-job support for online teaching, such as the strategies,
timing, and order of support that is most relevant and effective in supporting faculty teaching
online (Mohr & Shelton, 2017).

20

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

References
Al-Zahrani, A. M. (2015). Faculty satisfaction with online teaching in Saudi Arabia’s higher
education institutions. International Journal of Instructional Technology andDistance Learning, 12(4), 17–28.
Bawane, J., & Spector, J. M. (2009). Prioritization of online instructor roles: Implications forcompetency-based teacher education programs. Distance Education, 30(3), 383–397.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910903236536
Bozkurt, A., Jung, I., Xiao, J., Vladimirschi, V., Schuwer, R., Egorov, G., Lambert, S. R., AlFreih, M., Pete, J., Olcott, Jr., D. Rodes, V., Aranciaga, I., Bali, M., Alvarez, Jr., A.
V., Roberts, J., Pazurek, A., Raffaghelli, J. E., Panagiotou, N., de Coëtlogon, P.,
Shahadu, S…Paskevicius, M. (2020). A global outlook to the interruption of
education due to COVID-19 pandemic: Navigating in a time of uncertainty and crisis.
Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 1–126.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3878572
Cutri, M. R., & Mena, J. (2020). A critical reconceptualization of faculty readiness for online
teaching. Distance Education, 41(3), 361–380.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1763167
Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2004). Supporting self-regulation in student-centered webbased learning environments. International Journal on E-Learning, 3(1), 40–47.
Ferrario, K., Hyde, C., Martinez, B., & Sundt, M. (2013). An honest account of the humbling
experience of learning to teach online. Learning Landscapes, 6(2), 85–95.
https://doi.org/10.36510/learnland.v6i2.606
Foulger, T. S., Wetzel, K., & Buss, R. R. (2019). Moving toward a technology infusion
approach: Considerations for teacher preparation programs. Journal of Digital
Learning in Teacher Education, 35(2), 79–91.
https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2019.1568325
Haslam, C. R., Madsen, S., & Nielsen, J. A. (2020). Crisis-driven digital transformation:
Examining the online university triggered by COVID-19. In Proceedings of The
ISPIM Innovation Conference—Innovating in Times of Crisis, LUT Scientific andExpertise Publications. https://www.forskningsdatabasen.dk/en/catalog/2596528088
Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020, March 27). The difference
between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause
Review.https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergencyremoteteaching-and-online-learning
Jääskelä, P., Häkkinen, P., & Rasku-Puttonen, H. (2017). Teacher beliefs regarding learning,pedagogy, and the use of technology in higher education. Journal of Research on
Technology in Education, 49(3–4), 198–211.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2017.1343691
Johnson, N., Veletsianos, G., & Seaman, J. (2020). US faculty and administrators'
experiences and approaches in the early weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic. Online
Learning, 24(2), 6–21. https:// doi.org/10.24059/olj.v24i2.2285
Kearns, L. R. (2016). The experience of teaching online and its impact on faculty innovation
across delivery methods. The Internet and Higher Education, 31, 71–78.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.06.005

21

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Kebritchi, M. (2014). Preferred teaching methods in online courses: Learners' views. Journalof Online Learning and Teaching, 10(3), 468-488.
Kerres, M. (2020). Against all odds: Education in Germany coping with COVID19. Postdigital Science and Education, pp.1–5.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-020-00130-7
Liu, J. C. (2019). Evaluating online learning orientation design with a readiness scale. Online
Learning, 23(4), 42–61. https:// doi.org/10.24059/olj.v23i4.2078
Marzilli, C., Delello, J., Marmion, S., McWhorter, R., Roberts, P., & Marzilli, T. (2014).
Faculty attitudes towards integrating technology and innovation. International
Journal on Integrating Technology in Education (IJITE), 3(1), 1–20.
https://doi.org/10.5121/ijite.2014.3101
McQuiggan, C. A. (2012). Faculty development for online teaching as a catalyst forchange. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(2), 27–61.
Mejia, C., & Phelan, K. V. (2014). Hospitality instructors’ preference for blended teaching: A
bridge to full online course delivery? Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 14(4),343–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/15313220.2014.955304
Mohr, S., & Shelton, K. (2017). Best practices framework for online faculty professional
development: A Delphi study. Online Learning, 21(4), 123–140.
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i4.1273
Noon, E. J. (2018). Interpretive phenomenological analysis: An appropriate methodology foreducational research. Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice, 6(1), 75–
83. https://doi.org/10.14297/jpaap.v6i1.304
Pacansky-Brock, M. (2020, January 31). Untangling academic transformation throughuntethered, equitable professional development. Educause Review.
https://er.educause.edu/blogs/2019/1/untangling-academic-transformation-throughuntethered-equitable-professional-development
Pietkiewicz, I. & Smith, J. A. (2014). A practical guide to using interpretative
phenomenological analysis in qualitative research psychology. Psychological Journal,20(1), 7–14. https://doi.org/10.14691/CPPJ.20.1.7
Rogers, P. R., Morgan, S. D., & Cort, K. (2018). No one told me about the dark side: Pitfalls
for faculty teaching online. Global Journal of Business Pedagogy, 2(1), 112–120.
Rowe, F. A., & Rafferty, J. A. (2013). Instructional design interventions for supporting selfregulated learning: enhancing academic outcomes in postsecondary e-learning
environments. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(4), 590–601.
Scott, K. M. (2016). Change in university teachers' elearning beliefs and practices: A
longitudinal study. Studies in Higher Education, 41(3), 582–598.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.942276
Sinacori, B. C. (2020). How nurse educators perceive the transition from the traditionalclassroom to the online environment: A qualitative inquiry. Nursing Education
Perspectives, 41(1), 16–19. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NEP.0000000000000490
Smith, J. A. (2004). Reflecting on the development of interpretative phenomenologicalanalysis and its contribution to qualitative research in psychology. Qualitative
Research in Psychology, 1, 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088704qp004oa

22

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Smith, J. A. (2011). Evaluating the contribution of interpretative phenomenological analysis.
Health Psychology Review, 5(1), 9–27.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2010.510659
Smith, J. A., & Osborn, M. (2008). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In J. A. Smith(Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (pp. 53–81).
Sage. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470776278.ch10
Walters, S., Grover, K. S., Turner, R. C., & Alexander, J. C. (2017). Faculty perceptions
related to teaching online: A starting point for designing faculty development
initiatives. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 18(4), 4–19.
https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.340365
Wingo, N. P., Ivankova, N. V., & Moss, J. A. (2017). Faculty perceptions about teaching
online: Exploring the literature using the technology acceptance model as anorganizing framework. Online Learning, 21(1), 15–35.
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i1.761
World Bank. (2020, April 8). The COVID-19 crisis response: Supporting tertiary education
for continuity, adaptation, and innovation.
http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/808621586532673333/WB-Tertiary-Ed-and-Covid19-Crisis-for-public-use-April-9-FINAL.pdf
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000a). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M.
Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–
39). Academic Press.
Corresponding Author: Maha Al-Freih
Email: Maha.Alfreih@gmail.com

23

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

24

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Teaching Future Educators During a Global Pandemic
Jacquelynne Anne Boivin
Bridgewater State University
USA
Kathryn Welby
Merrimack College
USA

25

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Abstract
While schools are the center of attention in many regards throughout the COVID-19 pandemic,
programs that prepare educators have not received nearly as much attention. How has thereliance on technology, shifts in daily norms with health precautions, and other pandemicrelated changes affected how colleges and universities are preparing teachers for their careers?
This article walks the reader through the pandemic, from spring 2020, when the virus first shut
down the US in most ways, to the winter of 2021. The authors, two educator preparation faculty
members from both public and private higher education institutions in Massachusetts, reflect
on their experiences navigating the challenges and enriching insights the pandemic brought totheir work. Considerations for future implications for the field of teacher-preparation aredelineated to think about the long-term effects this pandemic could have on higher education
and K-12 education.
Keywords: COVID-19, hybrid, licensure, remote, teacher-preparation, virtual26

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Many overlook the impact the school closures and pandemic have on teacher-preparation
programs, who rely on their PK-12 (pre-school through twelfth grade) partners to provide andprepare teacher candidates for a career in education. Teacher candidates are students on trackto earn a teaching license. With the constant influx within the public schools, teacherpreparation programs must be ready to adjust and instantly change. Teacher-preparation
programs are higher education programs that lead to college students graduating with a publicschool teaching license. This paper conveys a perspective narrative from two teacherpreparation faculty members in different higher education institutions in Massachusetts – apublic institution with approximately 1,500 teacher candidates and a private institution withalmost 650 teacher candidates. In combination, the institutions are preparing nearly 2,000 of
Massachusetts future educators during a pandemic. This article is divided into four main
sections that present a timeline of considerations: springtime crisis in full bloom; summer ofplanning or summer of wondering?; fall semester’s trials and tribulations; and future
implications.
Springtime Crisis in Full Bloom
In mid-March of 2020, the United States was thrown into a state of panic and chaos. As a resultof the COVID-19 global pandemic, millions of students across the United States experienced
a dramatic switch in how their education was delivered, in-school delivery to home-basedlearning. As the coronavirus began spreading across the United States, education changed
abruptly. Schools at every level in Massachusetts, ranging from pre-school to higher education,
were forced to pivot their educational plans for Spring 2020 drastically. Suddenly, all
Massachusetts schools were mandated to go online for the remainder of the school year.
State and private institutions were forced to respond similarly. Living and learning on campus
was not an option. Students across the state were sent home to learn remotely for the remainderof the academic year. There was a sense of solidarity in the educational community and staying
at home was the safest decision. While some argue that online education quality does not matchthe rigor and sociability of in-person learning, others say that remote education is the only way
to ensure peoples’ safety. Either way, as a higher education community, both state and private
institutions had to adjust to the ever-changing educational landscape. An added challenge was
the lack of in-person practicums (hours logged in assistive/observational roles in classrooms),
field-based experiences, and other clinical requirements critical in teacher-preparation
programs. Specifically, the delivery of the rigorous Massachusetts licensure expectations ofteacher-preparation programs, while learning each of the district’s PK-12 distance learningmodels, had proven to be challenging for all the stakeholders involved. Such stakeholders
include students, school districts, and college faculty.
Teacher-Preparations’ Response
Teacher-preparation had no choice but to adjust and respond to the changing educationallandscape. Change can invoke a response, but there were too many stakeholders to have a wait
and see approach. While decisions were pondered, both students and faculty were fearful of
the unknown changes that would need to occur, adding stress and anxiety to an already stressful
landscape.
Student Response
Working with future teachers at the college-level online during a pandemic lacked any senseof normalcy. It was not uncommon to have students who are parents, working part-time, andjuggling their roles as employees, students, and caregivers within the confines of their full27

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

houses with everyone at home. Other students had to respond to family unemployment.
Specifically, some students whose parents lost their jobs due to the pandemic were working
extra hours at the local grocery store to make ends meet, while others had to take leaves towork full-time jobs to supplement families’ income. To provide for their families, students
were exposing themselves to the public in the hopes of having a meal on the table daily. Not
only having to cope with the added responsibility of providing for their families, these students
were also missing their placements and the continued development of relationships with theirstudents.
Other students had to take on the role of teachers and guardians to younger siblings as theirparents went to work. Students with parents working essential jobs had to assist their siblings
with remote learning, impacting their ability to complete course work and licensure
requirements. In sum, not only were they scared and worried about their health and theirfamilies’ health, but students were also concerned about how the pandemic would affect theirgrades and track toward licensure. In combination, all the stresses were adding up, and they
were simply in a state of prolonged anxiety and distress.
Faculty Response
Students were not the only group with anxiety and added stress. Having to pivot from in-personclasses to online classes half-way through the semester, teacher-preparation faculty had to deal
with a myriad of options and not a lot of time to figure out the best avenue. Zoom, Google
Classroom, or Microsoft Teams? Synchronous or asynchronous? Between quickly learning
new applications and trying to post everything on the college’s learning platform, like
Blackboard or Canvas, faculty soon learned that academics were not the only concern they had
to handle. Students were expressing their emotional distress and needed help. The facultyneeded to provide comfort and assurance in a time filled with doubt and concern while also
trying to teach, care for their families, and teach their children remotely with the school
closures. Everyone made it through the last few weeks of the semester, happily welcoming thewarm summer months with hopes of a normal fall semester. There were still so many
unknowns, but students and faculty welcomed the break.
Summer of Planning or Summer of Wondering?
The summertime brought educational professionals a chance to regain composure and plan forwhat laid ahead. It was clear that there was significant room for improvement regarding
teaching remotely. Teachers across the US, at every level, were participating in professional
development webinars and spending time meticulously improving their ability to teach as
effectively as possible in an online platform. As the summer progressed, it was clear that a
vaccine would not be ready, and there was discussion of another fall surge; Therefore, theefforts moving forward largely were with the mindset that schools would be remote without avaccine in place. As businesses reopened and there was a slight increase in the normalcy inpeople’s lives, talk of in-person schooling was on the rise. Decreased positive tests for the virus
provided some with the hope that we were on the other side of the pandemic and that being
inside classrooms has potential.
Summertime decreased the uniformity of educational decision-making. With the virus stillpresent in Massachusetts, educators wondered if all schools would be remote or would schools
be held in person. By mid-summer there was discussion that public elementary and secondary
schools were mostly opting to try in-person and hybrid approaches in the fall to avoid acompletely online avenue. This situation evoked large teacher protests and parental concerns

28Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

for child safety. Since there were so many flaws in remote teaching in the Spring, schools
wanted to avoid remote education as long as they could. But at what cost?
Higher education was met with this same issue, coupled with added financial pressures. Manyof the state’s public institutions’ decisions were to have classes remotely. Different funding
sources and levels of financial pain were the leading factors in deciding if an institution could
be online in the fall.
Some private institutions, afraid of closures, opted to open and provide students with a choice
to go in person or fully remote. For many institutions, fully opening, including allowing
students to attend and live on campus room was an expensive option, but their only choice to
avoid possible bankruptcy or closure. With the decision to open, funding had to be dispersed
to prioritize testing, tracing, isolation protocols, and adding campus-wide personal protective
equipment (PPE), which may have come from other sources leading to layoffs, furloughs, andsalary cuts.
Teacher-Preparation’s Planning
A typical summer for faculty in a teacher-preparation program is filled with professional
development, teaching summer classes, and pursuing scholarly endeavors through writing andresearch. This summer, in particular, was different. There was an enormous cloud of doubt thathung over the heads of faculty. This cloud of doubt was filled with questions and wonderings
like, “What is my institution going to choose for fall? Could we pivot half-way through? Will
my students get experience in actual classrooms? How will the state respond to ensure students
can still take their licensing exams and log their required hours? Are my partner districts
remote, hybrid, or in-person? Could that change? Do we now need to be teaching students bestpractices for teaching remotely as a professional expectation?” These questions made itchallenging for faculty to plan and prepare thoroughly since we did not know what the fall
would actually bring. A remote semester gave the promise of confidence in how the semester
would run, but an in-person or hybrid model still left faculty with a sense of insecurity. What
if the pandemic took a turn for the worst? Having to plan for one model yet plan for a possible
pivot to completely remote caused some faculty to prepare twice as much.
Additionally, every Tuesday throughout the summer and beyond, teacher-preparation program
leaders from public and private higher education institutions throughout Massachusetts would
meet with the Department of Elementary and Secondary Educations to discuss fall
expectations. The meetings were insightful and built a sense of community between all the
Massachusetts teacher-preparation programs, but most of the time, decisions were continuallychanging. With no one to blame, these meetings were difficult because of all the unknowns
such as the spread of the virus, no Prek-12 decisions, teacher union strikes and demands, andthe situation’s complete uncertainty. Planning for fall practicum (student teaching in the field,
where the future teachers is able to take full teaching responsibility by the end of theexperience) and field-based experiences were even more difficult with the unknowns within
the PreK-12 schools.
The Massachusetts Teacher Union was in disagreement with the Massachusetts Department ofElementary and Secondary Education’s decision to reopen the schools with concerns of staff
and student safety (MTA, 2020). Until a compromise was made between the state and the
public schools, teacher-preparation programs were in limbo and had difficulty making
decisions. The only option was to plan for multiple different situations and wait for decisions

29

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

to be made in PK-12. Most decisions were unknown until mid-August, around the same time
our students returned to campus.
As the college students began to return to campus with no concrete decisions on the PK-12
public schools’ operational plan, the real scramble began to successfully prepare our future
educators amidst the unknown and ever-changing public school landscape. As challenging as
it was to plan and implement simultaneously, most higher education institutions demonstrated
flexibility and adjusted as needed, leading to a fall semester like no other, simultaneously
planning, implementing, and adjusting.
Fall Semester’s Trials and Tribulations
The decision on what to do this fall was not taken lightly by either institution. Leaders had totake everything into account from the safety of their staff, faculty, and students through theoperations and budget of personal protective equipment, ever-changing enrollment numbers,
and a variety of instructional modalities to ponder. To make such extreme, college-widechanges within weeks was a daunting task. Both institutions opted for a different approach.
The public institution adopted a mainly remote option (with on-campus housing options andin-person classes for lab sciences and preforming arts), while the private institution adopted anin-person, on-campus experience. The fall semester has been a time of reflection, anxiety,change, and creativity.
At the beginning, the public institution was mainly remote, with some classes occurring in a
hybrid format on campus. This mostly pertained to classes that benefited from in-person
instruction, like lab-sciences and performing arts. In the elementary and early childhood
education department, all classes were remote, with the exception of student teaching during
the second semester of senior year. Those students were participating in whatever format theirschool district decided, although most had at least part of their week with students in-person.
In the private institution, approximately 90% of the education classes were taught in person
and on campus, with the hopes of creating a sense of normalcy in the community and keep
students engaged in the curriculum. Students were able to live on campus and experienced amodified yet enjoyable college experience. Specifically, outside dining increased with foodtrucks, outdoor wood fire ovens, and pizzerias throughout the campus grounds, in addition to
the typical college cafeteria options. Outdoor social opportunities increased with the purchaseof hundreds of Adirondack chairs and fire pits placed throughout the campus grounds forrelaxation and socializing. Tables with umbrellas were added in open areas to eat and work on
and open-air tents and patios with heaters popped up throughout the campus. Students adopted
a different, yet memorable, college experience.
Additionally, the institution was rigorous on protocols and expectations. Faculty members were
expected to undergo COVID testing once a week, while many students had to have COVID
testing bi-weekly. All testing was conducted on campus. Basketball courts were transformed
into COVID testing clinics, and medical labs were present on campus. The campus entranceswere guarded with strict entrance protocols along with phone application clearance to enter.
Within the campus, strict social distancing guidelines and testing, isolation, and quarantines
kept the fall semester running smoothly. In combination with alternative socialization methods
and strict COVID protocols, campus residence and academics were active and wellfunctioning.

30Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Although both institutions opted for different fall instruction models, both schools are large
teacher-preparation institutions and had to plan a course of action to prepare a combination ofaround 2,000 future Massachusetts educators to be immediately impactful in the field once they
graduate. Regardless of the model the leaders of the institution decided, both schools had toconsider how to successfully provide teacher-preparation education, pre-practicum, andpracticum experiences with minimal access to in-person experiences within the neighboring
public PK-12 school districts.
Life Without a True Pre-Practicum
Traditionally, students have field experiences working with students in schools before theirstudent teaching experience called the “pre-practicum.” According to the Massachusetts
Regulations for Licensure and Educator Preparation Program Approval, the pre-practicum isdefined “as the field-based experiences with diverse student learners that take place during theearly part of a candidate’s preparation” (603 CMR 7.02). Pre-practicum includes all field-based
experiences integrated into courses or seminars that address the Massachusetts Professional
Standards for Teachers (PST) and the Massachusetts Subject Matter Knowledge (SMK)
requirements. Although having limited access to the public schools, the expectations of a prepracticum experience did not waiver. However, the Massachusetts Department of Elementaryand Secondary Education did allow some modifications of the traditional pre-practicum
experience.
For example, in a math methods course in the public institution, the students usually get an
entire day at their field placement to practice teaching lessons and supporting students. This
serves as the pre-practicum fieldwork hours for multiple subject-specific methods courses.
During the fall semester, however, this was not feasible. Partnering school districts could not
host the students due to the various needs of adjusting to the myriad of safety protocols.
Students expressed, throughout the semester, that they were yearning for opportunities to workwith students. Rather than teaching lessons to a classroom full of students, they taught theirlessons to peers over Zoom. By also utilizing online tools like Mursion, for simulated teachingexperience with partial-artificial intelligence avatar students, some behavior management skills
were able to develop in these student teachers. In sum, the students whose experiences are
typically greatly reliant on fieldwork was a struggle to facilitate, but they did the best they
could with what they were given.
Video-recordings of classroom teaching were also a valuable resource, due to the lack of timespent in actual classrooms. Grissom (2020) advocates for using a variety of teaching videos
with structured forms for future teachers to fill out when observing such content. Suchobservational guides promote high-quality reflective practice, which is an evaluation elementin the state of Massachusetts. An emphasis on reflective observation has promise as serving as
highly conducive addition to an experiential learning plan (Grissom, 2020). Such an approachaligns with what was happening in the math methods course at the public institution, as students
had structured observation protocols and discussion prompt questions. Reflective discussions
after videos occurred between students and also between the instructor and the students.
Grissom (2020) affirms that such a mixture is recommended.
The same was true in the private institution. Two out of the three typical in person prepracticum experiences were not feasible, and access was limited in the surrounding school
districts with fear that college students may be spreaders of COVID in their communities.
Instead, over 15 hours of observational videos were compiled for students to watch and reflect
on the teaching they saw while adhering to strict guidelines of the Massachusetts Department

31

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

of Elementary and Secondary Education. The third pre-practicum was an experience at theschool the students were planning on completing their practicum at. Students were expected toattend if the school day was in person or hybrid. The districts had less of a problem withattendance in the third practicum because the teacher candidates would be part of their schoolfor the entire year.
Both institutions were able to pivot and re-create pre-practicum opportunities for students tolearn with limited public school access. What did the practicum experience look like during
the global pandemic?
Practicum: Areas Emphasized and Areas Lacking
After teacher candidates complete their pre-practicum requirement, traditionally, students will
be placed in practicum. A practicum usually takes place during the second semester of senioryear, right before graduation. According to the Massachusetts Regulations for Licensure and
Educator Preparation Program Approval (2020) a practicum is “a field-based experience within
an approved program in the role and at the level of the license sought, during which a
candidate’s performance is supervised jointly by the sponsoring organization and thesupervising practitioner and evaluated in a Performance Assessment for Initial License” (603
CMR 7.04). With all of the changes, how will the pandemic impact the practicum experienceof the student teachers?
After supervising student teachers in the public institution, it was evident that the student
teachers and cooperating teachers (classroom teachers hosting student teachers) felt that thepracticum experience emphasized specific skills to the extreme, while other experiences werelacking. For example, the need to establish clear classroom routines was more heavily stressedthan ever before, not just for the sake of routine and having a productive learning environment,
but for health and safety. There were concerns that elementary students lack the deep
relationship-building that comes with spending five days per week with their teacher. If akindergarten teacher who has been implementing a hybrid model only saw half her class at atime, for half the day, they may feel as though they have half as strong a relationship withstudents in the first few months as they would have had in a typical school year. They may lacka thorough understanding of the students’ strengths, weaknesses, and learning styles and worry
that the student teacher is missing out on the ability to practice observing these skills as
routinely as they should occur.
Trust and Whalen (2020) conducted a study in which they surveyed educators to gain insight
regarding their experiences in teaching during the Spring of 2020. It was clear, based on survey
results, that most classroom teachers (kindergarten through twelfth grade) were learning how
to teach using technology and in online capacities for the first time. They refer to this as“building the plane while flying it” (p. 193). After a summer of preparation and training intechnology, teachers were better equipped for remote and hybrid teaching in the fall. Trust andWhalen (2020) advocate for preparation programs to use this as an opportunity to better equip
future teachers with technological skills and networking. In all, the longer that educator
preparation programs are training teachers to be responsive to the pandemic, the more
conducive their practicum experience will be. Such training should include opportunities forstudent teachers to become familiar with video-conferencing platform features to be more fluidin their teaching so as to be more focused on the content being taught, rather than stumbling
through technological logistics (Maher, 2020).

32

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

With the fall 2020 semester done and plans for spring 2021 commence, discussions regarding
fall 2021 are already beginning. Will we be remote? Will there be a vaccine distributed toeveryone? The questions continue to accumulate, yet answers are yet to be found as only time
will tell.
Where We Go from Here?
While this global pandemic has meant a time of prolonged, heightened anxiety for people of
all ages, there have been some silver-linings to the experience for teacher-preparation
programs. These include increased respect for the teaching profession, increased flexibility forstudent teaching supervision assignments, more productive days for scheduling meetings, andmore streamlined technology incorporations.
In March of 2020, the teaching profession came into the spotlight as one of immense respect
and admiration. Suddenly, teachers were regarded by the public as heroes, and yard signs
marking teachers’ homes were symbols of pride and adoration. Teachers were the equivalentof health-care workers for their ongoing hard work and flexibility. As parents began to support
their children’s education at home when learning remotely, it became increasingly clear thatwhat teachers do every day is not easy. This pandemic has reignited a pride in teacher
candidates’ career paths.
Teacher-preparation programs are just one example of a field working primarily remotely since
the pandemic began. The public institution has been mostly remote since March 2020. While
supervising student teachers typically means having to physically go into schools to observe
teacher candidates numerous times throughout the semester, the observations still occur, but
via video. Student teachers can video-record their observations and upload them to a secure
server for the program supervisor to evaluate and provide feedback. There are some evident
benefits to this model. The first is that the program supervisor can be assigned student teachersin numerous locations since the travel-time is not a factor. Also, since the lessons are recorded,
the program supervisor does not distract students in the classroom when coming in to observe.
Another benefit of video-recording the lessons is that the program supervisor is able to pause
the video and take notes and then resume when ready. This allows for a more thorough writeup to supply the state documentation system when recommending the student teacher’s
endorsement toward licensure.
It is no surprise that days feel more productive in a remote setting in some ways. Rather thanhaving to walk across campus to various meetings, it’s easier to have meetings back-to-back.
This makes faculty more available to meet with more students as needed to provide them withmore one-on-one support. Some faculty have shared that more students show up during remote
office hours than when office hours were held in-person. This is attributed to students nothaving to travel to the office for a meeting, and if it’s just for a quick check-in or question, they
feel it is easier to meet in this capacity. Having meetings online also provides more
opportunities to attend workshops/webinars/conferences to continue professional
development.
By teaching online, faculty have increased their comfort and fluidity with video-conferencing
platforms, learning management systems, and other online resources. Some of the approaches
that are tried in the remote classroom will carry over to in-person learning in later semesters.
For example, using more document-sharing for in-class activities, rather than writing on chart
paper in small groups allows students to refer back to in-class activities and review othergroups’ work more routinely at their ease after class.

33

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

The private school experience was similar. Faculty members learned how to conduct paperless
lectures and create classroom experiences using various free virtual resources and applications.
Students are more available and willing to meet independently. Rather than trying to alignschedules for in person meetings, students would show up to remote office hours and seemed
more engaged and open to extra support sessions. Rather than having to walk across campus
for extra support offerings and office hours, they would show up virtually. Office hours of the
future, most likely, will continue with a virtual component. Additionally, faculty and staff
meetings are often more targeted and direct when conducted remotely than in person. The
agenda is followed, decisions are made, and action items are identified.
Another positive impact of the pandemic on teacher-preparation students are the opportunities
that students are presented immediately following graduation. Districts need technologicallysavvy educators. Students have proved to school districts that they have the required technicalskills to lead a remote classroom, making teacher-preparation students very desirable
candidates for immediate employment. Schools across the state have been reaching out to hire
recent graduates or soon to graduate students, even willing to hire emergency licensure
candidates who may not have passed the Massachusetts Test for Educator Licensure. Many
seniors already have employment opportunities for next year and have committed to schools
months before graduation.
Future Implications
The future of teacher-preparation will most likely look different because, as a result of thepandemic, the future of K-12 will most likely be forever altered. Teacher-preparation will betasked at looking beyond the textbook and beyond the schoolhouse while collecting andlearning the innovations that have emerged from remote learning. Teachers are implementing
various instructional styles to accommodate and differentiate instruction for all learners while
using a multitude of technological resources, breaking out students into working groups
through multiple platforms, co-teaching with service providers, and integrating more
technology into their everyday teaching. Teacher-preparation programs will be forced to keep
up with the innovations and rethink the current course of study by including more innovative
practices.
The global pandemic of 2020-2021 has proved that many practices are outdated, and we areexperiencing educational history and innovation. The routines and expectations at colleges anduniversities with educator preparation programs may shift with an emphasis on practicality andconvenience. This section now explores possible changes that warrant serious consideration
for the future of educator preparation in a post-pandemic world.
Recommendations
After the pandemic ends, classes at the PreK-12 level and higher education would notnecessarily have to be canceled due to inclement weather or building malfunctions since online
teaching is an established norm (Markos, 2020). This would, as a result, allow for learning tocontinue in scenarios that previously shut down schools. In addition, without work all
obligations being contingent upon being in-person, meetings for faculty at the PreK-12 level
and higher education may occur on video-conferencing platforms more frequently, thus being
more convenient for those professionals (Fogarty et al., 2020). In addition, meetings withstudents (in higher education for office hours) and parents (in PreK-12) may occur on videoconferencing platforms more frequently to better accommodate schedules and geographic

34

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

availability (Exstrom, 2020). With both students and parents having vast experience withvideo-conferencing platforms, the ease with which they can connect with educators increases
the convenience of such meetings. While remote and hybrid instruction may not continue to be
used as frequently in the future, educators may see value in the new instructional approaches
they have tried and continue them where they see the more benefit in post-pandemic times. In
addition, course content will need to include remote learning strategies to teach children withand without disabilities. This pandemic proved that remote learning would most likely continue
for many populations post-COVID (Superville, 2020). Greater emphasis on accommodating in
multiple modalities will need to be considered. A final recommendation is for teacherpreparation programs. Practicum supervision for program supervisors may continue being done
via video-recorded lessons, rather than the program supervisor visiting the school in-person.
This is more convenient for the program supervisor and allows for better feedback due to theability to pause and take notes. IT also avoids the program supervisor serving as a distraction
for students during the observed lesson, making for a more authentic lesson experience foreveryone. This is just one way the higher education is facing some long-term changes postpandemic (Llopis, 2020).
While this pandemic had posed countless challenges and required a level of flexibility andcourage that many education professionals have never had to put forth, the experience has madethe field of education stronger and has shed light on its resilience. Educator preparation
programs are sometimes a forgotten entity to the education community when thinking about
how teachers respond to the pandemic. In reality, these programs are the backbone of theprofession. Without them, where would schools get their high-quality educators? Educator
preparation programs have pivoted in response to the pandemic and while the experiences of
future teachers in these programs may have been lack-luster in comparison to what theirexperiences would have been prior to the pandemic, it is awe-inspiring what these programs
have been able to supply when considering the restrictions in place. Moving forward, with anadmiration for the accomplishments achieved in these trying times, it’s necessary to think about
how the challenges have improved what these programs do. The new learning and skills
required for faculty and students was not time-sensitive. Being more agile with technology is
not just a pandemic-specific skill. It’s integral that the field of education does not revert backto past-practice after the pandemic ends. Rather, the field of education needs to think critically
about how the experience can make it better for educators and students alike.

35

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

References
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. (2020). Educator
licensure and preparation program approval regulations.
https://www.doe.mass.edu/lawsregs/603cmr7.html?section=02
Exstrom, M. (2020, October 6). Will the pandemic change the way we deliver K-12
education? National Conference of State Legislatures.
https://www.ncsl.org/research/education/will-the-pandemic-change-the-way-wedeliver-k-12-education-magazine2020.aspx
Fogarty, P., Frantz, S., Hirschfeld, J., Keating, S., Lafont, E., Lufkin, B., Mishael, R.,
Ponnavolu, V., Savage, M., & Turits, M. (2020). Coronavirus: How the world of work
may change forever. BBC. https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20201023coronavirus-how-will-the-pandemic-change-the-way-we-work
Grissom, D. (2020). Experiential learning through video observations. In R. E. Ferdig, E.
Baumgartner, R. Hartshorne, R. Kaplan-Rakowski & C. Mouza, (Eds), Teaching,technology, and teacher education during the COVID-19pandemic: Stories from thefield (pp. 97–112). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education(AACE). Retrieved February 21, 2021 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/216903/.
Llopis, G. (2020, October 17). Post pandemic: How must colleges and universities reinvent
themselves? Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/glennllopis/2020/10/17/postpandemic-how-must-colleges-and-universities-reinventthemselves/?sh=37d4375d3e88
Maher, D. (2020). Video conferencing to support online teaching and learning. In R. E.
Ferdig, E. BaumgartnerR. Hartshorne, R. Kaplan-Rakowski & C. Mouza (Eds),
Teaching, technology, and teacher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: Stories
from the field (pp. 91–96). Association for the Advancement of Computing in
Education (AACE). Retrieved February 21, 2021 fromhttps://www.learntechlib.org/p/216903/.
Markos, M. (2020, December 16). End of snow days? Remote learning becomes new normal
for some districts in Mass. NBC Boston 10.
https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/brookline-schools-to-replace-snow-dayswith-remote-days/2258624/
Massachusetts Teacher Association. (2020, August 21). MTA rejects DESE guidance onrequiring remote teaching from schools. https://massteacher.org/news/2020/08/mtarejects-dese-guidanceSuperville, D. (2020, December 15). Remote learning will keep a strong foothold even after
the pandemic, survey finds. Education Week.
https://www.edweek.org/leadership/remote-learning-will-keep-a-strong-footholdeven-after-the-pandemic-survey-finds/2020/12
Trust, T. & Whalen, J. (2020). Should teachers be trained in emergency remote teaching?
Lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Technology and Teacher
Education, 28(2), 189–199.
Corresponding author: Jacquelynne Anne Boivin
Contact email: jboivin@bridgew.edu

36

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

An Educator’s Response to COVID-19: Preservice Teachers’ Perspectives
on Flipped Distance Education
Osman ÇilKırşehir Ahi Evran University
Turkey37

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Abstract
With the COVID-19 pandemic, students and instructors had to carry out lessons with distanceeducation practices, and this sudden change made it a necessity to reorganize educational
processes under the conditions of the pandemic. This study sought to make an undergraduate
course more effective by designing the distance education course based on the flipped learningmodel. In this qualitative study, a phenomenological approach was used, and 53 preservice
elementary school teachers’ views on the flipped distance education course were investigated.
Exploration of student errors during in-class activities, encouragement of active student
participation, and compatibility to individual student differences was listed as positive aspectsof the flipped distance education. On the other hand, the difficulties pre-service elementary
school teachers encountered in obtaining information, their concerns about attending the classor discussing the homework in front of their peers, and the issues experienced during in-classcommunication were identified as the negative features of this approach. Moreover, thepreservice elementary school teachers needed easily accessible information resources about thecourse content, a stable internet connection, appropriate technological equipment, andextension of the course time to effectively perform in the flipped distance education course. As
a result, the flipped teaching model emerged as an effective approach to increase the efficiency
of distance education courses, especially during the COVID-19 crisis.
Keywords: COVID-19, distance education, flipped education, preservice elementary school
teachers

38Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Introduction
The global COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 triggered sudden and unexpected crises in many areas
such as health, economy, and education, and the decisions that had to be taken to limit the
spread of the virus and reduce its negative effects have affected the habitual way of life
globally. Countries have had to suspend face-to-face education to reduce the spread of the
COVID-19 virus and have tried to provide distance education opportunities to ensure
continuity in education (Can, 2020). Before the COVID-19 pandemic in many countries,
distance education was usually offered at the level of associate, bachelors, and master’s
programs (Akdemir, 2011); with the pandemic, efforts have been made to make the education
system conditions work effectively by using technological equipment on a global scale andproviding distance education opportunities for all age levels. This sudden transition towards
distance education forced instructors to prepare and offer distance education courses and ledthem to seek effective distance learning opportunities. With this study, an undergraduate coursethat was given face to face before COVID -19 was adapted to distance education with a flippedteaching model, and the opinions of preservice elementary school teachers (PSETs) about thiscourse were examined.
Literature Review
Studies on distance education reveal that students prefer to use written materials rather than
distance education course videos (Can, 2020). In this context, the oral presentation of
information directly by the instructor in distance education courses loses its efficiency, and thenecessity of creating an approach that puts the student in the center arises. Current educational
principles advocate knowledge creation with the cooperation of teachers and students (Singh,2014) and recommend increasing students’ motivation and performance towards the lesson byusing developing educational technologies and supporting their beliefs about autonomy (Smitet al., 2014). Traditional education approaches are limited in meeting the individual needs ofstudents (Özbay & Sarıca, 2019) and trigger a desire for change in distance education courses(Ferreri & O’Connor, 2013). As emphasized by Bishop and Verleger (2013) an educational
system where students can access the content individually and adjust their own study time andspeed has become more desirable. Considering these developments in education, it is not
surprising that the use of the flipped learning model, which supports active learning and helps
to create extra time for in-class activities (Haak et al., 2011) and gives students more control
over their own learning processes in outdoor activities (Kim et al., 2014), has increased inundergraduate programs (Hao, 2016).
The flipped learning model can simply be defined as the replacement of information provided
to students at home and at school (Lage et al., 2000). In other words, the flipped learning
approach was designed on the principle of students’ reaching the subject-related concepts
through extracurricular activities and applying homework or projects that include studentcentered practices in the classroom, rather than learning the concepts of the course throughclassroom presentations and doing their homework at home (Torun & Dargut, 2015). With theflipped learning model, the acquisition of knowledge is mostly transformed from a group action
into an individual action, while the process of applying knowledge to student-centeredactivities turns into a group action (Hayırsever & Orhan, 2018). In this approach, the role ofthe teacher is not to be a direct source of information, but to guide and support the students inorganizing their own learning processes (Lopes & Soares, 2018). In the courses where theflipped teaching approach is applied, while the basic level information is obtained outside of
the classroom by the students with online video presentations, in-class applications that make39

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

the student active and require high-level mental skills are used during the course (Kim et al.,2014). Thus, with the application of the flipped teaching approach, actions that require
relatively low cognitive skills such as listening, understanding, giving examples are transferredoutside the classroom, and time is created for the teacher-guided implementation of classroom
activities that require high-level skills such as applying, analyzing and evaluating (Hayırsever& Orhan, 2018).
Numerous studies in the literature explain the positive effects of the flipped learning model on
students and the educational process (Köse & Yüzüak, 2020; Özbay & Sarıca, 2019). The
literature on flipped learning reveals that the flipped teaching model increases the participation(Kaya, 2018) and positive attitudes of students towards courses (Tekin, 2018), creates an active
learning environment (Pierce & Fox, 2012), and it affects the educational process positively bysupporting student permanence (Turan & Göktaş, 2015). In addition, the flipped learningmodel positively affects student achievement (Güç, 2017; Kalafat, 2019; Kırmızıoğlu, 2018),
anxiety (Özdemir, 2016) and motivation (Abeysekera & Dawson, 2015) and develops problemsolving skills (Kim et al., 2014). O’Flaherty and Phillips (2015) stated that the flipped learningmodel offers students the opportunity to learn at their own pace, access educational materials
whenever they want, and use lesson time for more efficient activities. With flipped learning,
students gained more control over their own learning processes and achieved an individualized
learning experience. Also, the flipped learning model can support students’ communication
skills by encouraging collaborative learning with metacognitive activities carried out in theclassroom (Millard, 2012).
Some negative situations also arise during educational practices with the flipped teachingmodel. The acquisition of information about the courses outside the classroom and the
management of this process is mostly under the control of the students, making it difficult tounderstand to what extent the desired information is acquired or how the desired homework isdone (Aydın & Demirer, 2015). In fact, not fully understood content and not fully preparedhomework can reduce the efficiency of planned metacognitive activities in the course.
Accessing the information provided for out-of-class activities requires an internet connectionand electronic equipment such as computers and tablets, and students’ inability to have that
equipment can negatively affect the efficiency and flow of the course (Hayırsever & Orhan,2018). Lastly, in order for the flipped teaching system to be implemented effectively,
instructors need to prepare materials suitable for this teaching approach; this process takes a
lot of time and effort (Milman, 2012).
The flipped teaching model can easily be associated with distance education applications, as itdelegates some of the responsibility for acquiring knowledge to the student and carries theteaching out of the classroom. In general, distance education is defined as a process in which
instructors and students are physically in different environments (Akdemir, 2011). Thisapproach, which aims to eliminate the time and space limitations between the teacher and thelearner, uses technology effectively according to the requirements of education (Bozkurt, 2017)and offers flexible education opportunities for individuals of all ages (Ağaoğlu et al., 2002). In
other words, distance education is an educational approach in which space and time limitations
are minimized, educational materials are easily prepared using equipment such as computers,
tablets, and phones, and the instructor and learner can access the desired information at any
time by using internet access (Yamamoto & Altun, 2020). Distance education practices, likemany educational approaches, have positive and negative effects on educational processes. The
positive aspects of distance education applications can be listed as the sharing of information
globally without time limitation, rapid evaluations and feedback on student projects, and40

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

providing access to courses for a large number of students at the same time, while potential
communication problems between teachers and students, problems students with limited
individual working skills experience, and high infrastructure costs that can be listed as negative
features (Dinçer, 2016).
MethodResearch Design
This qualitative study used phenomenological approach, which aims to investigate the opinionsof PSETs regarding the flipped distance education course. According to Yıldırım and Şimsek(2016), the phenomenological approach is based on investigating the events experienced bypeople in-depth with different perspectives. In this context, the positive and negative
experiences of pre-service teachers and the requirements to participate in the flipped distanceeducation course were examined.
Study GroupThe convenience sampling method, one of the purposeful sampling types, was used to create
the study group (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2016). Participants of the study were selected among the
PSETs who enrolled in a flipped distance education course at the undergraduate level offeredin a teacher training institution in Turkey. Although the PSETs enrolled in this course tocomplete the program they registered for, participation in the study was voluntary. It was
carefully explained to the PSETs that their participation in the study would not affect theirgrades in the course in any way and 53 of 67 PSETs who enrolled in the course volunteered toparticipate in the study. The information about the PSETs who participated in the study was
only seen by the researcher, and all names in the study were presented as pseudonyms.
Flipped Distance Education Course
Within the scope of this study, the Mathematics Teaching-I course in the undergraduate
classroom teaching program was adapted based on the principles of a flipped teaching model
to conduct distance education courses more effectively. The relationship of this flipped
distance education course with traditional distance education and flipped education models arepresented in Table 1.
Table 1: The relationship between the adapted flipped course model and traditional
approaches
Traditional lesson model
Presentation of
information by theteacher

Teacher / Student [In Class]Student [Out of Class]

Listening to informationby the student

Reinforcing
knowledge throughhomework

Conducting
educational activities
around information
Flipped lesson model

Student [Out of Class]
Research about thecontent knowledge

Comprehension of thedesired information

Teacher / Student [In Class]Conducting
educational activities
about the information

41

Reinforcing
knowledge throughactivities

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Flipped distance education course model (Weeks 1-7)
Teacher / Student [In Class]Presentationof basic
content
knowledge

Student [Out of Class]

Teacher / Student [In Class]

Examining
Research about Homework Reinforcing knowledge throughandthe content
preparation student homework
discussing the knowledge
homework
Flipped distance education course model (Weeks 9-14)
Student [Out of Class]

Research about thecontent knowledge

Teacher / Student [In Class]Preparation ofmathematics lesson
plans

Reinforcing the knowledge through the lessonplans prepared by the students

Data Gathering and Analysis
The risk of contamination of the COVID-19 virus was considered while conducting the study;
the entire data collection process was carried out using Google Forms to avoid posing atransmission risk. An online questionnaire was created, and volunteer participants were asked
to answer open-ended questions in the online questionnaire form. The questionnaire form
consisted of six open-ended questions such as ‘What are the problems you encountered during
the flipped distance education course?’, ‘Can you explain with examples what you need during
the flipped distance education course?’ Participant consent forms were also sent to volunteers
online, and only the data of the participants who completed the consent form in the study were
included.
The phenomenological approach was used to investigate the experiences of PSETs for theflipped distance education course, and the opinions expressed by the PSETs were analyzed
using the content analysis method. In the first stage, 15% of the obtained data was examined,
the main and sub-themes were determined, and the codebook was created by associating thethemes. Afterward, all of the data was analyzed in accordance with this content analysis
codebook. During the analysis of the data, the qualitative analysis principles suggested by
Lincoln and Guba (1985) were followed. The themes in the booklet have been reviewed andthe necessary changes have been made. For this purpose, new codes or themes that emerged
during data analysis were included in the codebook; the codes and themes that were initiallyadded but lost their meaning during data analysis were removed from the codebook (Lincoln& Guba, 1985). For instance, some themes regarding the differences between regular distanceeducation and flipped distance education were extracted from the codebook, since these themes
were very similar with positive effects of flipped distance education.
Findings
This study aims to examine the opinions of the PSETs about a flipped distance education
course. When the answers of the participants were examined, being able to correct student
mistakes in the lesson, ensuring active student participation, and supporting individual
differences were among the positive features of the flipped education. Difficulties encounteredin learning information individually, concerns about in-class performance or homework, andproblems of in-class communication draw attention as the negative features of this educational
approach. The PSETs also stated that they need easily accessible information and resources,
reliable internet infrastructure, technological equipment, and extension of the course time inorder to perform effective flipped distance education. The themes that emerged within thescope of the study are summarized in Table 2.

42

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Table 2: PSETs’ opinions about the flipped distance education course
Theme
Positive Effects

Negative Effects

Requirements

Sub-theme
Exploring student mistakes within the course
Active student participation
Promoting individual differences
Difficulties in learning information individually
Concerns about in-class performance or homework
Problems encountered in in-class communication
Information and resource needs
Internet infrastructure and technological equipment
Extension of the course time

PSETs
Rana, Hüma, Tarkan
Meltem, Nesrin,
Fatih Hüma, Efe
Salih,
Alpay, Tarkan, Asiye
Umut, Canan, Özkan
Melisa, Kemal, SunaÖzcan, Nesrin, Kadir
Fatma, Özcan, Sema
Umut, Sercan, Selin

Positive Effects
The PSETs often expressed their positive opinions about the flipped distance education course.
They stated that the subject was understood more effectively because they had the opportunity
to talk about student errors in flipped distance education courses, the information learned waslong-lasting because they were active during assignments or in-class discussions, and theability to freely access lecture video presentations supports the individual learning differences.
In the following quotation, Rana states that feedback on students’ mistakes is one of theadvantages of a flipped distance education course.
The theoretical part of the course is learned by the student outside the school,
so students have the opportunity to practice in the lesson. Since theimplementation part is carried out in the classroom, the teacher can help
them in the areas that he sees wrong, need to be corrected, and the students
have difficulty.
Similarly, Hüma noted that the examination of the homework they produced by the PSETs in
the flipped teaching lesson helped them realize their mistakes.
The fact that we are active in the lessons through the web has positively
affected us by enabling us to talk about our questions. Since not only teachers
but also students examine and discuss the homework, we can see ourshortcomings and recognize and correct the problems.
In another example, Tarkan explains the positive effect of teaching the lesson through the plans
the students created in the following quote:
Particularly in the application part, attending the lesson with the application
made by the student and explaining the mistakes made in the applications
makes it easier to understand.
PSETs were stated that the increase in student participation was another positive effect of the
flipped distance education courses on education. In the following example, Meltem explains
how focusing on the homework prepared by students in in-class practices affects their attitude
towards the lesson with the following sentences:
I definitely focus more on the math lesson than the other lessons. Since I knowthat I have homework and duty at the end. I listen carefully to the teacher and43

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

try not to miss what is being told. While doing my homework, I sort of repeat
the lessons we taught that week, so the topics are well understood for me.
In another example, Nesrin expresses how her preparation for flipped distance education
courses affected her with the following sentences:
Considering that a lesson is 40 minutes, the information we can learn islimited. However, in flipped education, we learn the subject because we
examine and investigate extensively; and we learn the important parts of thesubject during the lesson. I think the information is more permanent because
we have an active learning time.
In the next example, Fatih describes the role of the prospective teachers in the flipped distanceeducation courses with the following quote:In this learning method, the student is active. Thus, it makes learning morepermanent. It offers students the opportunity to practice. Students who learn
the subject beforehand reinforce the subject by practicing. Thus, the subject
is learned both theoretically and practically.
Participants also stated that they have more control over the learning process with the flippededucational practices and being able to manage this process to their individual differences isan advantage. In the following quotation, Salih explains how being able to reach presentations
on the subject whenever they need helps students who have individual differences:
Students try to learn the same subjects in the same period of time in otherclassroom methods. While some students can get information faster, somestudents may need more time. In this case, problems arise due to individual
speed. But in the flipped education, students can stop, rewind, and re-watch
the videos prepared on the topic at any time. By planning the subject
according to his/her learning time, the student learns more easily.
Hüma explains the advantages of recording lecture presentations and being able to watch themat any time, with the following sentences:
Course topics in flipped learning are pre-recorded and presented to us
digitally. Thus, we can study and learn subjects at our own pace with ourlearning style. In a system with such flexibility, knowledge becomes morepermanent because we learn more with our efforts.
Efe also explained how students’ individual differences were supported through flipped
distance education with the following sentences:
In the flipped teaching method, individual differences are more prominent.
Some students may not understand the subject when the teacher tells in
traditional narration, but since the subject described in the flipped teaching
method has been recorded before, students can watch the video again where
they do not understand. It is also easy in terms of being portable. It is always
at hand. Students can reach the lessons 24/7.

44Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Negative Effects
Students and educators described various problems in the flipped distance education course, as
in many courses given by distance education. The difficulties they encountered while searching
and finding the information in the course by themselves, the anxiety caused by showing the
prepared homework to the whole class, and the in-class communication problems identified as
negative situations that emerged in the flipped distance education courses. For example, Alpay
points out his concerns about delegating the responsibility of the learning process in thefollowing quote:I think that leaving the students alone while learning the subject and asking
them to understand will decrease the efficiency of learning. It can be difficult
for students to learn the lesson on their own and to participate in classwork
as they learn. Since the student is responsible for the learning activities, thecomplete learning of the lesson may not take place.
Similarly, Tarkan states that he has difficulty understanding which concepts are important in
the following sentences:
It is a really difficult process to research and to learn a new subject.
Understanding takes time as well as effort. Although the practices in thecourse are very useful for learning, it seems that something is still missing
when we cannot predict the essential parts that need to be learned.
Asiye, on the other hand, expresses the problems students may experience while accessing thenecessary information with the following quote:
The students coming to the class without watching the lecture videos may notenough to comprehend the subject even if they participate in the in-classactivities. Since students cannot ask for something they do not understandwhile watching the lecture videos outside the classroom, there is a possibilityof misinformation.
Participants reported that they experienced anxiety while taking an active role in the courseand expressing their ideas or sharing their homework with their peers. In the following
example, Umut explained how this anxiety affected his in-class performance as follows:
At first, I was very nervous while attending the class. The thought that it would
be my turn soon, I would not be able to explain and be disgraced, wasreducing the efficiency of the lesson. But when I attended the class several
times, I got rid of this panic situation.
Canan expressed her concern that her homework could be seen by her peers in the following
quote:
Since it was not a method we often encounter, it was different at first; I
worried about whether I did it wrong or whether they were making fun of it
because all our friends could see the homework we did.
Similarly, Özkan expressed the pressure on which the presentation process of the assignments
was created on him:

45

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

During the lesson, as the homework is presented, I wonder if I did it wrong,what kind of feedback will I get if I did it wrong, and I wait in stress andanxiety.
Since the students and the instructor are more active in the flipped education lessons, problems
related to in-class communication have emerged. For example, Melisa explained how her being
able to attend the course only via message due to technological impossibilities affects her views
towards the course in the following quote:We are not on equal terms. The system is working over the internet, which isalso a problem in terms of connection. I can’t feel like I’m attending class.
We have communication problems because we write our questions.
Similarly, Kemal exemplifies that problems with internet connection affect in-classcommunication and reduce the efficiency of the course with the following sentences:
There may be technical difficulties due to distance education. Students may
not be able to immediately ask the subjects they are stuck with. Since noteveryone can connect with the same internet speed and does not have thesame infrastructure, the quality of the course can be reduced.
Suna, on the other hand, expresses her views on the necessity of the teacher to effectively
manage in-class communication as follows:
The teacher needs to be a good guide in the classroom. The teacher should
be involved in classroom activities and make short explanations where
necessary. Since the students do not know exactly what is right and what iswrong, the teacher must have a leading position in the classroom.
Requirements
When the requirements of the flipped distance education courses were examined, three main
themes have emerged. Participants stated that they needed resources suitable for flippededucation, technological equipment, and a stable internet connection to prepare theassignments effectively and present them in the classroom. Also, it was emphasized that the
duration of the lessons should be extended in order to examine more homework. For example,Özcan stated that he would like to constantly access resources and training:
I need the information to be accessed at any time. For example, I would liketo be able to access the resources offered to us by the teacher in time so that
we can repeat at home what we have learned in the distance education
courses prepared with the flipped teaching method.
Nesrin expressed the information pollution in the sources on the internet and the need for areliable textbook with the following sentences:
A reliable resource is definitely what I need most for effective teaching in the
flipped teaching method. There is a lot of information and articles on theinternet. Opinions and articles on the subject are given differently on eachwebsite. But if we had a sourcebook, the information will more accurate andreliable.

46

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Similarly, Kadir explained his need for a source containing examples related to the subject toreinforce the theoretical issues presented during the course with the following quote:I need plenty of examples. The examples given during or after the lesson are
an effective way for me to reinforce the subject. Sometimes I wonder whether
I understood the thing correctly. A good example helps me answer thequestions in my mind.
Participants frequently emphasized that they needed not only online resources but also
technological equipment to be able to listen and participate orally in theoretical lectures and toprepare their homework within the scope of flipped learning. For example, Fatma explains thenegative effects of an unstable internet connection on student motivation with the following
sentences:
Good internet infrastructure is required. Internet is required to participate inlive classes, to get and understand the information before the lesson. Students
who do not have an internet connection or have an unstable low-speed
connection may have difficulties participating in class. Students who havesuch problems may not be able to focus on the lesson because they are
worried about connection.
In the following quotation, Özcan explains how a lack of technological equipment cannegatively affect student attendance:
Due to technical problems (speakers, internet infrastructure, etc.), students
may not be able to transfer the content of the homework they have. For
example, we could not turn on the speaker in our homework on the theory ofmultiple intelligences, and I prepared it according to the form I would
verbally present. When I could not speak up, I could not fully convey what I
wanted to tell in the homework.
Similarly, Sema expresses the negative effects of disruptions caused by technologicalequipment and internet connection on the education process with the following quote:
Since teachers and students should be active in flipped teaching, theconnection problems we experience on the internet sometimes affect the flow.
For example, after the teacher explains the subject, the students study it,
repeat it and prepare a presentation. The presentation of the students mustalso be carried out during the lesson time. When there is a connection
problem, we cannot participate. While the students try to join, the teacher
tries to solve the problem.
Participants often stated that the lesson duration was insufficient in terms of the activities to be
done. For example, Umut expressed his views regarding not being able to allocate sufficient
time for theoretical knowledge in the following quote:
During the lesson, we sometimes cannot understand the subject because we
process the subject very quickly. Sometimes we find it difficult to do
homework because we don’t understand. Increasing the number or durationof the lessons may be a solution for better understanding.

47

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Selin, on the other hand, stated her opinions about not being able to provide feedback to allstudents in the following quote:
There is a need for fewer student numbers in the classroom [67 students wereenrolled]. Thus, all students’ work can be examined, and their mistakes canbe said one by one. In the crowded classroom, the teacher cannot give
feedback on all students’ homework. This may upset the student whose
homework is not examined.
Similarly, Sercan explained his views on not being able to devote enough time to theexamination of homework with the following sentences:
It is good for me to first explain the subject on the digital platform and thenreinforce the subject with homework and examine the deficiencies in the next
lesson, but sometimes we cannot discuss every single homework due to theinsufficient amount of time and a large number of students.
Discussion
Many undergraduate programs began distance education in 2020 to minimize the spread of the
COVID-19 pandemic and to protect the health of students and teachers. In this study, an
undergraduate level distance education course was rearranged according to the flipped learning
method, and the opinions of the PSETs regarding the course were examined.
Hayırsever and Orhan (2018) described one of the requirements for the implementation of the
flipped teaching model as the creation of educational culture and stated that with this method,
students’ active participation is provided by allocating more time to activities in the classroom
due to the acquisition of some of the information outside the classroom. In our study,
participants stated that the flipped distance education course facilitated active participation in
the lesson. Similarly, Karadeniz (2015) emphasized the importance of reflecting knowledge
during flipped learning practices and stated that providing opportunities for transferring theinformation intended to be taught using in-class activities is a necessity for effective teaching.
Active student participation increased with in-class applications with high-level activities
implemented with the flipped teaching model, and students were allowed to reflect on theknowledge they obtained outside the classroom. Also, educational activities should beorganized in a way to correct improper learning that may occur during research, homework,and projects that students have done outside of the classroom with the flipped teaching model(Torun & Dargut, 2015). The teacher candidates stated that examining their homework during
the lessons provides an opportunity to notice their mistakes. Finally, teacher candidates defined
it as a positive feature that they could access information whenever they wanted with theflipped teaching model, so they could organize the learning process in a way and frequency
that they preferred and stated that this approach supports students’ individual study preferences(O’Flaherty & Phillips, 2015).
Aydın and Demirer (2015) noted that the acquisition of basic information about the course by
students outside the classroom may weaken the instructor’s control over the educational
process and can reduce the efficiency in education. Similarly, the pre-service teachers who
participated in our study stated that they had difficulties while obtaining information about the
subject or trying to find a reliable and purposeful source of information. They defined one of
the negative aspects of the flipped learning model as the obligation of accessing information.

48

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Also, the necessity of electronic equipment such as computers and tablets for researching
information in the course, preparing homework, or listening to the lesson within the scope of
distance education, may decrease the efficiency of the course (Hayırsever & Orhan, 2018). It
was observed that some of the PSETs’ attitudes towards this lesson were negatively affected
since they did not have a microphone or a stable internet connection. Also, participantsemphasized that not being able to use electronic equipment or software properly or unstableinternet connections during the lesson negatively affected classroom communication andreduced the effectiveness of the course. Lage et al. (2000) stated that approaches that affectconventional educational process dynamics, such as flipped teaching, can cause anxiety instudents. Similarly, PSETs participating in our study stated that they were anxious while
actively participating in the lesson or sharing their homework with their peers in this unfamiliar
system that emerged with flipped teaching.
One of the effective ways to minimize the negativities about flipped distance education will be
to determine the requirements for the course in advance and to take measures. Karadeniz (2015)
emphasized that not all students will have the same opportunities while preparing the flipped
distance education courses and stated that in-class and especially out-of-class activities should
be organized carefully. Many PSETs who participated in the study stated that they needed
appropriate and reliable resources to complete their assignments. In this context, while
applying the flipped education model, educators should take into account that the informationin external sources cannot always be accurate and suitable for the purpose, and they should
prepare materials proper for the flipped teaching for the essential information that students
need to acquire and the projects and assignments they need to prepare (Milman, 2012). Also,
some of the PSETs stated that they could not attend the course because they did not havemicrophones, and some had problems during the lesson because of the lack of stable internet
connections. To minimize these problems, it should be taken into consideration that students
may not have the technological equipment and software required by the flipped distanceeducation courses. Thus, in-class and extracurricular activities should be organized flexibly byconsidering these negativities. Finally, PSETs stated that the number of students enrolled in
the course was high, and the duration of the lessons should be extended. Since the in-classteaching methods applied in flipped classrooms focus on metacognitive skills and can takeconsiderable time, the class population should also be carefully determined when planningflipped distance learning courses. Also, students should be given enough time to apply the
information they have acquired outside of the classroom.
Recommendations
Considering that active participation in the lesson lies behind the ability of students to reflect,
ask questions, make predictions, evaluate and build relationships between information during
the lesson (Hockings et al., 2008), it is considered that flipped distance education courses may
be more effective than traditional distance education courses. There are a limited number ofstudies investigating the effect of distance education courses prepared with a flipped teachingmodel on student achievement. In this context, examining the effects of flipped distanceeducation courses on student achievement at various education levels could support literature.
Karadağ and Yücel (2020) noted that only 63% of the students had internet connections while
66% had computers or tablets in 2020. Due to the conditions of COVID -19, distance education
started suddenly, and the extent to which instructors and students have the technologicalequipment and internet infrastructure required by distance education could not be adequately
controlled. Some of the PSETs who participated in this study also stated problems regarding
equipment and internet connection quality. Investigation of the extent to which instructors,

49

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

students, and educational institutions have the technological equipment and internet
infrastructure required to fulfill the distance education requirements on a global scale will
provide important information for the more effective implementation of distance education
courses to be applied during the COVID -19 pandemic and in the future.
Conclusion
With the COVID-19 Pandemic, habits accepted as normal in life had to be changed, and faceto-face education was suspended on a global scale to reduce the spread of the pandemic. During
the pandemic, distance education opportunities were tried to be used to ensure the continuityof education, and educators seek ways of providing effective teaching or evaluation under
distance education conditions (Can, 2020; Kuzu, 2020). However, a few of these pre-service
teachers had trouble finding proper equipment or programs to participate in-class activities.
Since it might have affected those pre-service students’ perspectives about flipped distanceeducation, lack of appropriate equipment was the main limitation of this study.
Most of the PSETs welcomed the flipped distance education course designed within the scopeof this study. Positive opinions about the flipped distance education course were not only statedby the PSETs who participated in this study, but similar results were also obtained in studies
conducted in undergraduate-level economics, engineering, and health courses (Critz & Knight,
2013; Karabulut ‐ Ilgu et al., 2018; Roach, 2014). Considering that Karadağ and Yücel (2020)stated that the experiences gained during the COVID-19 pandemic process will affect the
distance education culture, it will not be surprising that the flipped distance education model
will be used more frequently in undergraduate-level courses.

50

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

References
Abeysekera, L., & Dawson, P. (2015). Motivation and cognitive load in the flippedclassroom: Definition, rationale and a call for research. Higher Education Research &Development, 34(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.934336
Ağaoğlu, E., İmer, G., & Kurubacak, G. (2002). A case study of organizing distanceeducation: Anadolu University. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 3(1),45–51.
Akdemir, Ö. (2011). Distance education in our higher education. Journal of Higher
Education and Science, 1(2), 69–71. https://doi.org/10.5961/jhes.2011.011
Aydın, B., & Demirer, V. (2016). Flipping the drawbacks of flipped classroom: Effective
tools and recommendations. Journal of Educational and Instructional Studies in theWorld, 6(1), 33–40.
Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013, June). The flipped classroom: A survey of theresearch. ASEE National Conference Proceedings, Atlanta, GA.
Bozkurt, A. (2017). The past, present and future of the distance education in Turkey. Journalof Open Education Applications and Research, 3(2), 85–124.
Can, E. (2020). Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and pedagogical implications: Open anddistance education applications in Turkey. Journal of Open Education Applications
and Research, 6(2), 11–53.
Critz, C. M., & Knight, D. (2013). Using the flipped classroom in graduate nursing
education. Nurse Educator, 38(5), 210–213.
https://doi.org/10.1097/NNE.0b013e3182a0e56a
Çakar, V. (2019). The effect of using a flipped classroom model on learning products inphysics education (Unpublished Master’s thesis). Zonguldak Bülent Ecevit
University, Zonguldak.
Dinçer, S. (2006, February). An overview of computer assisted education and distanceeducation. Academic Information and Communication Conference, Pamukkale
University, Denizli.
Ferreri, S., & O’Connor, S. (2013). Redesign of a large lecture course into a small-grouplearning course. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 77(1), 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe77113
Güç, F. (2017). Rational numbers and the effects of flipped class application on rational
numbers operations (Unpublished Master’s thesis). Amasya University, Amasya.
Haak, C., HilleRisLambers, J., Pitre, E., & Freeman, S. (2011). Increased structure and active
learning reduce the achievement gap in introductory biology. Science, 332, 1213–
1216. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1204820
Hao, Y. (2016). Exploring undergraduates’ perspectives and flipped learning readiness intheir flipped classrooms. Computers in Human Behavior, 59, 82–92.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.01.032
Hayırsever, F., & Orhan, A. (2018). Theoretical analysis of the flipped learning model.
Mersin University Journal of Education Faculty, 14(2), 572–596.
https://doi.org/10.17860/mersinefd.431745

51

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Kalafat, H. Z. (2019). Investigation of the effect of the mathematics lesson designed with theflipped classroom model on the academic success of 7th grade students (Unpublished
Master’s thesis). Marmara University, İstanbul.
Karabulut‐Ilgu, A., Cherrez, N., & Jahren, C. (2018). A systematic review of research on the
flipped learning method in engineering education. British Journal of Educational
Technology, 49(3), 398–411. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12548
Karadağ, E., & Yücel, C. (2020). Distance education at universities during the new type ofcoronavirus pandemic: An evaluation study within the scope of undergraduate
students. Journal of Higher Education, 10(2), 181–192.
https://doi.org/10.2399/yod.20.730688
Kaya, D. (2018). The effect of flipped learning model in mathematics teaching on secondary
school students’ participation. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 8(4), 232–
249. https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.453729
Kırmızıoğlu, H. (2018). Processing 11th grade chemistry course with flipped classroommodel: A case study (Unpublished Master’s thesis). Bahçeşehir University, İstanbul.
Kim, M. K., Kim, S. M., Khera, O., & Getman, J. (2014). The experience of three flippedclassrooms in an urban university: An exploration of design principles. The Internetand Higher Education, 22, 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.04.003
Köse, S., & Yüzüak, A. (2020). Studies on the flipped classroom model in science andmathematics education: A thematic review. Bartın University Journal of Educational
Research, 4(1), 15–33.
Kuzu, O. (2020). Pandemi dönemi uzaktan eğitim sürecinin matematik öğretmeni adaylarınınsınav performanslarının değerlendirilmesine yansıması. Birey ve Toplum Sosyal
Bilimler Dergisi, 10(2), 239–271. https://doi.org/10.20493/birtop.817549
Lage, M., Platt, G., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an
inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30–43.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220480009596759
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8
Lopes, A. P., & Soares, F. (2018). Perception and performance in a flipped financial
mathematics classroom. The International Journal of Management Education, 16,
105–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2018.01.001
Millard, E. (2012). 5 Reasons flipped classrooms work: Turning lectures into homework toboost student engagement and increase technology fueled creativity. University
Business, 15(11), 26–29.
Milman, N. (2012) The flipped classroom strategy: What is it and how can it be used?
Distance Learning, 9(3), 85–87.
O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A
scoping review. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 85–95.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.002
Özbay, Ö., & Sarıca, R. (2019). Trends of studies conducted for the flipped classroom: A
systematic literature review. Ahi Evran University Journal of Social Sciences
Institute, 5(2), 332–348.
https://doi.org/10.31592/aeusbed.595036

52

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021Özdemir, A. (2016). Blended learning-oriented flipped classroom model application in
middle school mathematics teaching (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). Gazi
University, Ankara.
Pierce, R., & Fox, J. (2012). Vodcasts and active-learning exercises in a “flipped classroom”
model of a renal pharmacotherapy module. American Journal of Pharmaceutical
Education, 76(10), 196. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe7610196
Roach, T. (2014). Student perceptions toward flipped learning: New methods to increaseinteraction and active learning in economics. International Review of Economics
Education, 17, 74–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iree.2014.08.003
Sharma, N., Lau, C. S., Doherty, I., & Harbutt, D. (2015). How we flipped the medical
classroom. Medical Teacher, 37(4), 327–330.
https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.923821
Singh, G. (2014). Emerging trends and innovations in teacher education. Indian Journal ofApplied Research, 4(5), 166–168. https://doi.org/10.15373/2249555X/MAY2014/52
Smit, K., Brabander, C., & Martens, R. (2014). Student-centered and teacher centeredlearning environment in pre-vocational secondary education: Psychological needs,
and motivation. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 58(6), 695–712.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2013.821090
Tekin, O. (2018). Application of the flipped classroom model in high school mathematics
class: A mixed method study (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation). Tokat
Gaziosmanpaşa University, Tokat.
Torun, F., & Dargut, T. (2015). A suggestion on the feasibility of the flipped classroommodel in mobile learning environments. Adnan Menderes University Faculty of
Education Journal of Educational Sciences,6(2), 20–29.
Turan, Z., & Göktaş, Y. (2015). A new approach in higher education: Students’ views on the
flipped classroom method. Journal of Higher Education and Science, 5(2), 156–164.
https://doi.org/10.5961/jhes.2015.118
Yamamoto, G. T., & Altun, D. (2020). Coronavirus and the inevitable rise of online
education. Journal of University Studies, 3(1), 25–34.
https://doi.org/10.26701/uad.711110
Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Qualitative research methods in the social sciences.
Seçkin Publishing House.
Corresponding author: Osman Çil
Email: ocil@ahievran.edu.tr

53

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

54

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Why Graded Assessment for Undergraduates During the COVID-19
Lockdown? An Experience Introspection
Abdullatif Alshamsi
Higher Colleges of Technology
Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Alex Zahavich
Higher Colleges of Technology
Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
Samar El-Farra
Higher Colleges of Technology
Dubai, United Arab Emirates

55

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Abstract
This paper presents a retrospective evaluation of the Higher Colleges of Technology’s student
assessments during the COVID-19 lockdown, reflecting the justified decision to deploy gradedassessments during the lockdown for students to academically progress and/or graduate ontime, while maintaining the quality and rigor of academic awards. The outcome-based
evaluation of this paper is intended to provide lessons for any future situations of thissignificance and magnitude. While online education was the obvious response to the pandemic,
the provision of assessments was not possible without risk. Taking a high-stakes decision thatwould affect the future of thousands of students, for years to come, involved complex steps ofreasoning and justification. Addressing the role of graded assessment in supporting institutional
accountability and transferability of students’ achievements, student efficacy and informed
pedagogy alterations were the main objectives. To meet those objectives, the Higher Collegesof Technology was able to deploy an off-campus student assessment model that builds upon
three pillars of adjustments (assessment development and deployment; technology
infrastructure; and governance resilience) to support students’ learning, while mitigating
vulnerabilities. The evaluation of student performance indicators and stakeholders’ satisfaction
rates revealed a successful deployment of off-campus assessment while maintaining the
traditional conventions pertaining to evaluation of assessments.
Keywords: COVID-19, formative, online assessment, summative56

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Background
The Higher Colleges of Technology (HCT) is the largest federal higher education institution(HEI) in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), being founded in 1988 and having awarded morethan 92,000 undergraduate degrees in Applied Media, Business, Computer Information
Science, Engineering Technology, Health Sciences, Education, and Military and Security.
Amongst many other accreditations, HCT is one of the first six HEIs in the world to receive
accreditation from the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA).
HCT had 19,614 undergraduate students registered in 16 campuses for the spring-2020
semester at the time COVID-19 was declared a global pandemic. Transitioning to full, online
delivery was an intuitive strategic intervention that ensured timely, legitimatized student
learning progression and graduation. However, an evident quality and accountability dilemma
surfaced around the issue of student assessment. While instructional delivery was possible withminor challenges, such as developing new strategies to ensure student engagement during class,providing reliable evidence of student attainment through assessment was a challenge. As was
described by the QAA, alternative assessment approaches became as crucial as the alternative
pedagogical provisions. As degree-awarding institutions, governing entities expect HEIs tomaintain academic standards when implementing adjustments to the learning and assessment
strategies in response to COVID-19 (QAA, 2020a). Globally, some HEIs decided to cancel
assessments, while some opted to use Pass or Fail grading schema (Burke, 2020).
As the struggle between safety and accountability was assuming academic detrimental
proportions, HCT realized that cancelling assessment was not possible. However, HCT’s
existing curricula are designed for on-campus delivery including physical proctoring, so
placing assessment adjustments and using e-proctoring tools became evident. Additionally, theconcerns over undertaking large scale modifications to existing assessment frameworks, in an
extremely limited time, became a global concern (Joint Information Systems Committee[JISC], 2020). Within a few days, HCT reviewed its options and available resources, whilebalancing the best interest of students with curricular integrity, and the welfare of students andstaff. The aspiration of setting an example for students to thrive during disruptions was also anadded incentive for the decision to utilize graded assessments.
Summative assessment (SA) validates student academic progression with credible evidence,and in conjunction with formative assessment (FA), both assessments contribute to thedevelopment of students during their learning journey (Cilliers et al., 2010; Knight, 2002; Lau,
2016). Academics admit that assessments influence learning behaviors and experiences morethan teaching (Medland, 2016). Similarly, students and teachers equally believe that exam
marks are the main influencer on study strategies. Students even admit to shuttling between
deep, superficial learning and effort management adjustments just to pass or score high marks(Al-Kadri et al.,2011). Moreover, students perceive SA as an extrinsic motivation, especiallybecause they perceive the outcome as a reward for their work. Hence, academics see SA’svalue as outweighing the burden on staff in terms of enhancing the learning (Trotter, 2006).
Formative assessment is predominantly used for learning and is empirically linked to student
self-regulation tending to impose cumulative effects on students’ thinking, actions, and feelings(Hawe & Dixon, 2017). It is also an assessment as learning (Black & Wiliam, 2003),
accomplished through assessing students’ competencies during instruction, coupled withfeedback to improve students’ learning and academics’ teaching (Cilliers et al., 2010;
Guerrero-Roldán & Noguera, 2018; Knight, 2002; Lau, 2016).

57

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

It is unorthodox for academics to change pedagogy without enough planning, training, andpiloting. Due to the concerns of faculty to engage in a high-stakes enterprise without
detrimental consequences, assessment is the area of least change in HEIs (Deneen & Boud,2013). It is customary for faculty to investigate how students’ learning is affected by any
changes in teaching methods based on the students’ performance in FA so they would adapt
their teaching approaches. Conducting FA during the online pedagogy provided impromptu
valuable guidance for faculty to adjust their teaching thus buffering the abrupt switching oflanes between on and off-campus pedagogy.
While e-proctored off-campus assessments can potentially increase student academic
dishonesty (SAD), HCT addressed SAD from the moral imperative “Do No Harm”, whichassumes the position of keeping SAD to as-low-as reasonably achievable levels: an approach
used commonly for management of safety-critical systems. Simply expressed by Williams andWong (2009),
While there will always be a small number of students who will cheat, themain priority should be to focus on the higher quality learning outcomes ofthe majority, rather than set up an entire system to stop a small minority (p.
234).
Discussions and deliberations were held with various stakeholders, including campus student
council representatives and the UAE Ministry of Higher Education, to mention a few.
Eventually, HCT deployed the Off-Campus Student Assessment Model (OCSAM) which
ensured stakeholders’ engagement and builds upon placing assessment adjustments, enhancing
the technology infrastructure by the introduction of e-proctoring, and exhibiting governanceresilience to support students’ learning while mitigating the risks. The foundation of OCSAM
observes QAA,2018 assessment principles and preserves curricular alignment to maintainacademic standards (AlShamsi & El-Farra, 2021).
At the end, the retrospective evaluation of SAD rates, make-up rates, grades and cumulative
Grade Point Average (cGPA), and graduation rates, in addition to the stakeholders’ satisfaction
results have indicated a successful intervention in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Why Graded Assessments in the First Place?
Summative assessment like final exams, dissertations, or final projects are conducted uponcompletion of an episode of teaching (for example, a course) and are mainly designed to assess
students’ learning without providing student performance feedback for improvement. The
importance of SA is related to its ability to measure students’ comprehensive outcomes’
achievement with sound evidence, which supports accountability of HEIs (Bearman et al.,2016; Chong, 2018; Dixson & Worrell, 2016; Guerrero-Roldán & Noguera, 2018; Knight,
2002; Stödberg, 2012; Timmis et al., 2016). Complementing SA are FA instances, assessment
tasks deployed periodically throughout the duration of the semester like quizzes, reports, andpresentations with extensive reliance on structured feedback to provide guidance on how students
could improve their learning, and how faculty could adjust their teaching (Knight, 2002; Trotter,2006). Despite the debate around which assessment is better, having both types of assessments canprovide invaluable pedagogical improvement tools for academics and students (Banta &Palomba, 2014; Chong, 2018; Crisp, 2012; Knight, 2002; Lau, 2016).

58

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

While some HEIs, at the global and local levels, have deferred assessments or applied Pass orFail grading schema, HCT justified deployment of graded assessments based on: establishingaccountability expectations to provide validated and transferable credentials; enhancing
students’ motivation and efficacy; and using feedback of FA to provide impromptu guidance
to academics to prognosticate how successful this unprecedented pedogeological intervention
may or may not be.
Accountability and Transferability
Predominantly, assessment of learning supports HEIs’ accountability for students’
employability prospects. When assessment or a collection of assessments warrant/certify
achievement, grades are interpreted as metrics of performance that must be construed with trustand confidence by students, academics, institutions, employers, and quality assurance agencies(Knight, 2002). In addition to certification, SA provides information about the students’ levelof mastery (Trotter, 2006), thus informing progression to the next level of the study (Crisp,2012). Moreover, assessment outcomes provide trustworthy evidence of students’ attainment
and provide stakeholders with astute judgements about students’ achievements in statedlearning outcomes (Knight, 2002).
In its COVID-19 initial guidance for higher education providers on standards and quality, the
QAA stressed the need for HEIs to carefully define the extent that is deemed as sufficientevidence to verify achievement of learning outcomes, regardless of the different levels ofcourses and students. Additionally, HEIs which decide to award credits or qualifications tostudents who have not completed all planned assessments, need to record the basis for thatdecision (QAA, 2020a). In other words, while addressing the pandemic has required flexibility,
quality compromises were not advised and when compromises were necessary, proper
documentation must be carried out. To this end, and from an accountability standpoint, gradedassessment was still the only possible avenue by which HCT could provide student learning
quality assurance for all stakeholders.
Transferability of learning instances between different HEIs indicates that achievements of thelearner can transfer to other settings and depends on the learning methodology (Knight, 2002).
As official student records, transcripts are expected to accurately provide clarity on what
adjustments have been made, regardless of the lockdown conditions. This, however, should bebalanced against creating a perception that the spring-2020 awards are less credible than otheryears (QAA, 2020a). By positioning assessments at the heart of evidencing achievement, HCT
decided to give leverage to transferability for students and safeguard their performance, so they
are not “stigmatized”. So, like all previous semesters since the establishment of HCT, spring2020 graded assessments can be tracked down for evidence of attainment at any time in a
student’s life.
Student Motivation and Self-efficacy
Students are reward-oriented beings, who are less inclined to make an intensive effort for lowstakes assignments, even if the learning activities were appealing (Cilliers et al., 2010). Also,
students seem to prefer assessments that extend discriminatory indications of academic
capacity. Furthermore, students perceive marks obtained without assessment as being unfair(Iannone & Simpson, 2017). It is also evident that assessment has an unswerving impact on thequality of students’ learning and performance (Al-Kadri et al., 2011; Cilliers et al., 2012;
Medland et al., 2016; Trotter, 2006; Van de Watering et al., 2008). The effect of assessment
goes even further, as students tend to alter their learning behaviors against their longer-termgoals and quality of learning. It is also not uncommon for students to gauge the scale and59Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

distribution of effort of study based on what an examiner was likely to ask (Cilliers et al., 2010).
Likewise, research describes a directly proportional relationship between the associatedmagnitude and severity of assessment consequences, and students’ learning (Al-Kadri et al.,2011; Cilliers et al., 2012). Learning behaviors are even shaped by students’ perception of theassessment impact (Cilliers et al., 2010, 2012). Some students get achievement-motivated,based on the weighting of the assessment, so they plan their study strategies around passing or
scoring high marks (Al-Kadri et al., 2011; Cilliers et al., 2010). Raupach et al. (2013)
empirically reported that students perceive ideal and innovative teaching approaches as
useless if incentives of SA are not offered. Finally, students reported that when they knowthat they are being assessed they start calibrating their studies so they would meet theassessment expectation regardless of adversities, such as short time frames and study loads(Cilliers et al., 2010). On the grounds of the above three demands, it was evident to HCT thatonline teaching, without conducting graded assessments, would not benefit students’ learning,
nor would it support HCTs’ accountability or transferability of achievement.
Feedback for Informed Impromptu Pedagogy Adjustments
For distance learning HEIs, which are designed to deliver online programs, off-campus
pedagogy and e-proctoring are not new. However, applying such off-campus pedagogy tocurricula, which were intended for face-to-face on-campus delivery without exhaustive
adjustments did not take place in the recent history of education. Identifying tools to probe theimpact of such a paradox of delivering non-online pedagogy in an online context was crucial.
Formative assessment is frequently considered a valuable tool that shapes curricula to enhancelearning (Crisp, 2012; James, 2016). Also, because FA are low-stakes, feedback and outcomesof formative assessments became the instrumental “new” way of HCT faculty examining theefficiency of the “new curriculum delivery”. As a result, faculty started employing FA
outcomes during the spring-2020 to guide impromptu adjustments to their teaching andassessment in attempt to mitigate this paradox.
Addressing Assessment Requirements Under Lockdown
Assessment in the HCT context was addressed for the emerging requirements of the lockdown.
Requirements addressed were at the academic and the technology and assessment deployment
levels while tackling the vulnerabilities.
Assessment in HCT Context – Historical Background
HEIs declare key learning outcomes and teaching and assessment processes associated toprovide stakeholders with clear accounts about claims and warrants of student attainment(Knight, 2002). Each program in HCT has program learning outcomes (PLOs) which arealigned with the institutional graduate learning outcomes, and accreditation entities. Each PLO
cascades down to aligned course learning outcomes (CLOs). In enhancing the educational
process, assessment is effective when CLOs and PLOs are aligned (Abdeljaber & Ahmad,2017). Apparently, alignment of assessment with curriculum objectives gives students a senseof security, which enables deep learning activities (Al-Kadri et al., 2011).
The HCT’s 73 academic programs are offered in a multi-campus/multi-faculty course delivery
model. In such models of delivery, consensus and common understanding about priorities andexpectations are of paramount importance (Banta & Palomba, 2014). While faculty need toagree about the way the CLO attainment will be tested, students also need to be well informed
about their performance expectations. To ensure inclusiveness and equal opportunities, course
syllabi are made available for all faculty teaching a course, and for all students enrolled. Course

60Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

syllabi outline assessment plans specifying information, such as CLO mapping, time, grades
and types of and tool for each assessment activity. This plan is developed and reviewed byfaculty every semester, paving the way for consensus and common understanding of
expectations.
Students’ final grades should be a representation of combined outcomes of several and different
assessment methods (Iannone & Simpson, 2017). Institutional HCT assessments come in avariety of types and are spread out across the semester. Moreover, warranting achievement
based on different and recurrent instances provides more dependable inferences of attainment
levels (Knight, 2002). Also, for an effective assessment approach, FA and SA should be aligned
so FA is not undermined by the known summative pressures (Black& Wiliam, 2003).
Therefore, HCT programs have a balanced number of assessment instances carefully planned
so assessments have an acceptable pattern of occurrence. Coursework (CW) assessments areseveral formative assessments ranging from 4 to 12 assessment instances and are deployed toassess one or more CLO. Coursework is characterized with the provision of improvementcentered feedback and accounts for 70% of the total marks. Additionally, summative
assessments in the form of identical final exams across all 16 campuses, referred to as facultywide assessments (FWAs), are indicative of the comprehensive modular attainment prompting
progression to the next level and are used as cumulative program learning outcomes attainment.
For the vast majority, FWAs assess all CLOs in a single instance to confirm the comprehensive
attainment of course objectives. FWAs are high-stakes assessments worth 30% of total course
grade.
Before the pandemic, over 20,000 students were enrolled in approximately 700 multiple
offering courses, with 400,000 CW assessments being conducted throughout a typicalsemester. At the end of each semester approximately 650 courses have FWAs. Written CWs
and FWAs are conducted online or paper based with physical proctoring as a requisite(AlShamsi & El-Farra, 2021). This configuration provided a baseline in preparation for the offcampus assessments, delivered during the imposed lockdown described in the following
section.
In response to the lockdown, assessment adjustments were carried out at the academic level
through modification of assessments designs, to address risks associated with e-proctoring,
while maintaining curricular alignment. In addition, several technology tools were deployed tofacilitate improved exam security conditions.
Assessment Design Adjustments
Theoretically, if the existing curricular alignment remains preserved, HCT can defend
allegations of learning outcomes attainment, but SAD under e-proctoring conditions remains achallenge. Despite a lack of agreement amongst scholars about the relationship between eproctored assessments and SAD rates, during planning the “out of an abundance of caution”
position was adopted based on reported concerns over e-proctoring entailing potential SAD
increased rates (King et al., 2009; Mellar et al., 2018). Notwithstanding SAD risks, pedagogy
plays an essential role in SAD rates, so HCT academics meticulously reviewed assessment
design and conditions to curb students from committing SAD as suggested by QAA (2018).
With acceptable trade-offs of re-allocations of weightings’ contribution to the final student
grade, and changes in assessment tools (as in replacing a quiz with a project). The approved
assessment design adjustments ensured the following:61

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021a) Maintaining alignment across curricular components so all CLOs are duly assessed,
and students’ grades can be used as a direct measure of student CLOs’ attainment.
b) Maintaining a variety of assessment tactics, as suggested by QAA, (2018), which gave
the faculty opportunities to cross-verify individualized student performance
discrepancies in assessments that require reflection such as portfolios against an eproctored quiz. Assessment portfolios and case studies do provide insight into thecharacteristics of students’ performance variances, thus providing attribution evidence(Ransome & Newton, 2018; Stack, 2015).
c) Incorporating post-submission oral defense, or viva-voce as both provide valuable
insight on authenticity and contribution of the students’ attempted assessments (DeVilliers et al., 2016; QAA, 2020b).
d) Upscaling the cognitive complexity of assessments, so assessment tasks that require
lower cognitive complexities, such as remembering and understanding items which areeasy to cheat using the internet were replaced by application and analyzing items assuggested by Boitshwarelo et al. (2017), Donnelly (2014), JISC (2016), and Redecker
et al. (2012).
Finally, five main assessment strategies were approved for deployment namely: limited-timeassignment coupled with oral verification; open-book upscaled cognitive complexity
assessment; e-proctored assessments; virtual laboratories; and projects, portfolios, andpresentations.
To address workload and stress issues, programs were given the option to alter the percentagesof contribution by completed assessments to students’ final grades prior to the lockdown,
wherever feasible. Also, because the teaching schedule was not compromised, assessments
were conducted on their expected times. Finally, as recommended by JISC (2016) and QAA(2018), assessment requirements, topics, deadlines, learning outcomes assessed, marking
criteria, and feedback arrangements were clearly communicated with students and staff.
Technology and Assessment Deployment Adjustments
While instances of CW did not pose a serious challenge from the technology standpoint,
technology was most challenged during the FWA period, as those assessments were taking
place for the entire HCT cohort during the same times and dates. Also, FWAs have an inherent
risk of increased SAD potential as compared with CW instances which have relatively lower
contribution to the students’ grade. Therefore, SAD becomes less appealing to students ascompared to FWAs.
On the positive side, HCT students were sufficiently exposed to the e-assessment environment
as many assessments depended on BlackBoard® prior to the lockdown. However, all written
assessments were conducted under physical proctoring within campuses. Consequently, eproctoring was deployed, preceded by a common mock exam for all students to orient them forthe technology aspects of the FWA. Furthermore, assessment technology related guidelines
were published, and an exam schedule was issued, taking into consideration equal distributionof concurrent test takers at any given time, while ensuring technology was not overloaded.
Additionally, and in congruence with Davis et al. (2016), Mellar et al. (2018), Okada et al.
(2019), QAA (2020a,2020b), and Stake (2015), HCT deployed several authentication andauthorship verification measures. For example, student ID and recorded and/or live webcams
were used to authenticate students’ identities.

62

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Exclusive availability of the exam to pre-enrolled students, based on institutional registry was
also used to prevent unauthorized individuals from attempting the assessment for a student.
Authorship verification was extended through recorded and/or live sessions, used to monitor
students and the surrounding environment while flagging suspicious acts. Respondus
Lockdown® was also used to disable access to prohibited materials and activities, such asaccessing the internet or email. Lastly, unexpected higher grade than average performance wasconsidered a trigger to review the assessment recordings.
Addressing Vulnerabilities
While making such a sharp turn, it was foreseeable that existing vulnerabilities might beexacerbated, and new vulnerabilities might surface. Accordingly, HCT’s responses were basedon risk identification and mitigation through inclusion of all students regardless of theiracademic performance, with special focus on vulnerable students. Governance support,
academic support, and logistics and technology support were deployed to mitigate
vulnerabilities.
Governance support. Unequivocally, SAD policies and procedures are needed (QAA, 2018).
However, flexibility in addressing the lockdown conditions became equally essential (QAA,
2020a). Balancing between mandates and resilience, HCT has subsequently adopted a flexible
application of policies and procedures to address the pandemic-imposed e-proctoring
requirements. Perhaps the most obvious necessary governance response was to permit
assessment strategy adjustments during an ongoing academic year, even more critical as it wasalmost half-way through academic semester. Academic divisions adjusted the existing preapproved assessment strategies, while maintaining the existing grades in percentile translated
into letter grades. To mitigate vulnerable student risks, HCT devised an algorithm that denotes
the last academic standing cGPA for each student as a main reference so any decline inperformance will not be reflected. For spring-2020 such an exemption was significantly
important for students on academic probation whereby grades were only reflected if a student
would experience an improved cGPA score thus protecting those students from being
academically dismissed. Based on the initial guidance recommendations of QAA (2020a),students were also given the option to defer a course with no penalty. Also, the exam make-up
policy was amended to accommodate cases where technology impacted assessment conduct.
The list of students with disabilities was reviewed again on a case-by-case basis, allowing
further submissions and adjustments to be in place, thus avoiding inadvertently creating new
barriers for students (QAA, 2020a). The only relatively new encountered situation was for
those students with visual impairment, who would usually require large font prints. In this case
HCT has provided those students with large monitors to complete the exams at home. Finally,
student awareness campaigns were initiated to provide guidance on SAD. Moderated
discussion forums, mental health and wellbeing activities and tips on managing student life
were also extended through activities, such as virtual advising.
Academic support. During the lockdown, faculty were the most influential communication
conduit. Supporting students for assessment is a critical component of quality in HEIs (QAA,
2020b). Therefore, more than 1.1 million hours of recorded pedagogical activities using videoconferencing platforms were delivered to preserve the intended teaching schedule plans andclass times, with no down-time. Full curriculum delivery not only enhanced the learning
opportunities but also warranted no compromises to the timely assessments. Faculty used classtimes to clearly communicate the adjusted assessment expectations. They also offered several

63

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

off-campus practice exams, so students were better oriented with e-proctoring, as advised by
Davis et al. (2016).
Logistics and technology support. Between May 10-19, 2020, 19,614 students, sat for 59,357
final e-assessments, for a total of more than sixty-six thousand concurrent exam hours. A key
logistics strategy to ensure students were not encumbered by technology issues during theassessment process was the deployment of “Emergency Response Teams” at each campus.
Students were able to receive live, online support from respective campuses with a recorded
average response time of two minutes. Less than 4% of the total 59357 assessment sessions
experienced technical difficulties (AlShamsi & El-Farra, 2021). To mitigate the risks, various
SAD detection tactics were deployed such as reviewing recordings and comments by aninternal auditor who would flag suspicious observations for review.
An Outcome-based Evaluation
To evaluate the efficacy of the employed intervention, we investigated SAD rates, make-up
rates, grade and cGPA trends, and graduation rates as student performance indicators andstakeholders’ surveys as satisfaction indicators.
Student Performance Indicators
We investigated SAD rates as the main risk of off-campus assessment. Exam “make-up
excuses” were also analyzed as an attribute to behavioral reasons, rather than honest ones
(Abernethy and Padgett, 2010). Grade comparison is reportedly a useful tool to measure theeffectiveness of pedagogical interventions (Jaggars and Xu, 2016), and in a recent literature
review (178 journals) 63% referred to cGPA as a performance indicator (Zughoul et al., 2018)
so grades and cGPA trends were evaluated. Additionally, grades are reportedly used toempirically explore SAD patterns (Daffin & Jones, 2018; Davis et al., 2016; Hylton et al.,2016; Stack, 2015). Finally, graduation rates were also reviewed as a drive for the intervention.
Student academic dishonesty. During assessment, suspicious actions were identified by the
e-proctoring staff (live or retrospectively). Faculty and internal auditors also analyzed
educational data forensics such as abnormal student performance. In spring-2020, 0.4 % of thetotal number of students (85 /20,461), compared with 0.5 % of (111/20,722) reported in fall2019 were found guilty of SAD. Grade analysis findings, in addition to the subtle decline in
the SAD percentages are a confident indication of absence of major exam security breaches(AlShamsi & El-Farra, 2021). Table 1 outlines spring-2020 and fall-2019 SAD statistics.
Table 1: Spring-2020 and fall-2019 SAD trends.
Semester
Numbers of SAD instances
Total number of students enrolled
Percentage of SAD

Spring-2020
85
20,461
0.4 %Fall-2019111
20,7220.5 %Make-up rates. Assessment make-up rates for spring-2020 had an insignificant 0.5% decrease,
compared with the preceding semester. There was a decline by 32.8% of the make-up for sickexcuses, and a drop from 30.4 % in fall-2019 to only 1.8% in spring-2020 for being late for theexam. Make-up rates, due to technical issues, have spiked from none in the preceding semester
to 397 instances (71.9%) of all make-up cases in spring-2020. AlShamsi & El-Farra (2021)
concluded that the favorable decline in the make-up rate could be attributed to fixable policies

64

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

and/or to taking exams from home without travelling to campus, thus entailing less stresslevels. Table 2 depicts the make-up trends for the spring-2020 and fall-2019 semesters.
Table 2: Spring-2020 and fall-2019 make-up statistics comparison (AlShamsi & El-Farra,
2021) – adjusted

Semester

Total
enrolled
students

Fall-2019

20,990Spring2020

20,461

Total
makeupcases% ofStudents
approved for
Make-up

0

674

3.2%

397
(71.9%)

552

2.7%

Reasons for make-up
Sick

Late forexam

315(46.7%)
76(13.8%)

205(30.4%)
10(1.8%)

Technical
issuesGrade and cGPA trends. HCT adopts the letter grading of A through F with an A letter-grade
representing scores above 88% and corresponding to distinguished achievement, and an F
letter-grade representing scores below 60% and corresponding to failure of assessment/course.
HCT documents historical data on performance variances and inconsistencies like students whoachieve a distinguished A or B (A/B) letter-grades in CW but paradoxically achieve an F or D
(F/D) letter-grade in FWA as a tool to ensure assessment quality.
In the absence of a grades baseline under e-proctoring conditions, five student performanceletter-grade inconsistencies were alternatively compared with the preceding semester, thoseare: students failure rates in high-stakes FWA as compared to the FA accumulation of lowstakes CW; percentage of HCT students achieving CW and FWA letter-grades that are within
the same letter-grade range for example, scoring a C in CW and a C+ grade in FWA);
percentage of HCT students achieving higher letter-grade in CW than in FWA; percentage of
HCT students achieving A/B letter-grade in CW, while scoring D/F in FWA; and percentage
of HCT students achieving D/F letter-grade in CW, while scoring A/B in FWA. Results ofletter-grade discrepancies of spring-2020 as compared to fall-2019 are:
1. failure rate in FWA has decreased to only 2½ times higher than CW as compared to 6
times higher in fall-2019,
2. percentage of students scoring within the same letter-grade range across CW and FWA
favorably increased from 14.4% to 17.8%,
3. percentage of HCT students achieving higher letter-grade in CW than FWA havesignificantly and favorably declined from 20% to 6%.,
4. percentage of HCT students achieving A/B letter-grade in CW, while scoring D/F in
FWA has significantly and favorably declined from 24% in fall-2019 to 14% in spring2020,
5. percentage of HCT students achieving D/F grade-letter in CW, while scoring A/B
grade-letters in FWA has exhibited an unfavorable slight increase from 1% to 3%. Thisslight decline evident by a 2% increase in the percentage of students scoring D/F in CW
while their FWA letter-grades were in the A/B range.
The improvement in the four discrepancies can be attributed to the cognitive complexity
upscaling and adjustments to incorporate more reflective assessments like projects, portfolios,
and the introduced oral verification which gives students better opportunities to exhibit theircomprehension thought discussions and reflections. Also, as non-native English speakers, oral

65

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

discussions give students an opportunity to better express their comprehension compared withwritten responses that might irreversibly fail them in the translations. Because both FWA andCW were only approved with pre-existing rubrics to be used across all campuses, leniency ingrading can be excluded.
The factors that might have contributed to the unfavorable higher gap in the fifth discrepancyare:a) Coursework only assesses fragments of the course, so it is common for student to scorehigher grades than in FWAs. The trade-offs of weightings’ contribution to the final
student grade made it mathematically easier for students to achieve a higher overall
course grade.
b) In congruence with the established relationship between assessment and student
behavior, allocating lower weight to FWAs and the devised cGPA algorithm, made itless appealing for students to perform well in the FWAs because their achieved A/B
grade in CW would grant them an A/B final course grade even with poor FWA
performance and, if not, a student could opt for fall-2019 cGPA freeze.
c) Subjectivity in grading non-exam assessments, such as projects and presentations.
Although all assessments are only deployed if they have corresponding rubrics toensure consistency, the grades for traits such as soft skills are rarely void of subjectivity.
Table 3 summarizes letter grade inconsistencies trends across the spring-2020 and fall2019 semesters.
Table 3: Summary of letter grade inconsistencies performance for the spring-2020 ascompared to fall-2019.
Spring 2020
Failure rate in
FWA is 2½ times
higher than CW
17.8%

Fall-2019
Failure rate in
FWA is 6 times
higher than CW
14.4%

6%

20 %

14%

24%

3%

1%

Description of inconsistency
Overall student failure rates in FWA compared to
CW
Percentage of students who scored grades within
the same letter grade range across CW and FWA
Percentage of students who scored higher CW
grade than FWA
Percentage of students Percentage of the samewith A/B in (CW)
with D/F in (FWA)
Percentage of students Percentage of the samewith D/F in (CW)
with A/B in (FWA)

HCT adopts the 4-point cGPA with scores less than 2.0 corresponding to unsatisfactory
academic performance, and scores between 3.5 and 4 corresponding to distinguished academic
performance. In the spring-2020 semester, students were given a limited time option to request
a previous semester cGPA freeze if their results had disadvantaged them. A normal distribution
was evident in the spring-2020 overall cGPA scores. The percentage of students with cGPA
below 2.0 was 20% (3,799/ 19,614), 72% (14,170 /19,614) students have achieved a cGPA
between 2.0 and 3.49 points, and 8% (1,645/ 19,614) students have scored cGPA between 3.5
and 4 points. Table 4 summarizes spring-2020 semester cGPA distribution as an indicator.

66

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Table 4: Spring-2020 semester cGPA distribution.
Spring-2020 cGPA
Less than 2.0
2.0 to 3.49
3.50 to 4.0
Total

Student count (percentage)
3,799 (20%)
14,170 (72%)
1,645 (8%)
19,614 (100%)

Graduation rates. On-time graduation is a long-term key performance indicator for HCT
which monitors the graduation of a student within the prescribed program duration (forexample, four years for a bachelor's degree). Graduation maturation periods are measured inyears, so they are used as an indirect indicator within this context. If HCT have opted to put
assessment on hold for the spring-2020, students in their last semester would have at least
experienced a semester long delay in graduation. Although the percentage of graduating ontime for the academic year 2019-2020 was 93% compared to 73% for the preceding 2018-2019
academic year, this statistically significant improvement cannot be solely attributed to thedecisions taken to address the pandemic. However, the fact that graduation rates did not drop
supports the claimed efficacy of the intervention.
Stakeholder Satisfaction Indicators
Surveys are useful formative tools which provide feedback that guides curricular adjustments(Peterson, 2016). At the end of the semester, students and faculty, were surveyed to measure
the levels of acceptance and success. Also, employers were surveyed as part of the bi-annual
institutional performance monitoring, a synopsis of the surveys’ results is provided below.
In addition to the bi-annual surveys, extensive ad hoc surveys were carried out to monitor
student and faculty satisfaction for the semester. A total of 5,744 faculty and 19,601student
responses showed that faculty had an 87% overall satisfactory e-delivery experience, whilestudents’ overall experience satisfaction rate was 77%. The survey covered five categories:
online learning readiness; content evaluation; instructor delivery method; overall experience;and class preference. Faculty confirmed that the orientation sessions have sufficiently enhanced
their online pedagogical skills. Furthermore, faculty reported witnessing students presenting
higher levels of responsibility and ownership of their learning. Additionally, the bi-annual
surveys have revealed an upward trend of student satisfaction with their academic journey from78% in the 2018-2019 academic year to 86% in 2019-2020. Finally, 71% of the respondents
were satisfied in response to a survey of HCT faculty members to review their satisfaction withadjusted assessments.
Moreover, HCT deploys bi-annual surveys to monitor industrial satisfaction, the percentage of
employer satisfaction with applied programs industry relevance have registered a slight
improvement from 90% in the 2018-2019 academic year to 93% in 2019-2020. Table 5summarize surveys outcomes. A sample of the surveys is provided in the appendix.
Table 5: Surveys outcomes for faculty, students, and industry.
Criteria
e-delivery satisfaction
Student academic journey satisfaction
Adjusted assessments
Industry relevance satisfaction

Faculty87%

Students
77%.
86%

Industry

71%
93%

67

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Limitations
The novelty of the circumstances imposed a lack of reference data to constitute student
performance comparisons, and a lack of previously published literature limited our findings
and literature review comparisons. Further work is required to study the performance, per thetype of assessment adjustment and to establish links between other variables, such as
demographics.
Conclusion
This paper provides evidence on the importance of assessment as an integral part of the HEIs
pedagogy. Maintaining HCT curricular alignment, incorporating assessment tactics thatprovide personalized authorship evidence, supplementing written assessments with oralpresentations, upscaling assessment cognitive complexity, and addressing vulnerabilities ofoff-campus graded assessment were interventions used to maintain accountability andtransferability of HCT credentials, support students’ self-efficacy and motivation, and to guidethe “new” online teaching methodology imposed by the lockdown. Student performance andsatisfaction of stakeholders used to evaluate the efficacy of HCT’s intervention as describedindicate HCT successfully achieved the objectives, as outlined.
The intervention defined in this paper is of value for future considerations when HEIs arechallenged by disruptions such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

68Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

References
AlShamsi, A., Mohaidat, J., Al Hinai, N., & Samy, A. (2020). Instructional and business
continuity amid and beyond COVID-19 outbreak: A case study from the higher
colleges of technology. International Journal of Higher Education, 9(6), 118–135.
https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v9n6p118
AlShamsi, A., & El-Farra, S. (2021). Assessment in higher education, successful response
off-campus student assessment model (OCSAM) to catastrophes and pandemics.
Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability. Under revision.
Banta, W., & Palomba, A. (2014). Assessment essentials: Planning, implementing, andimproving assessment in higher education (Second ed.). Jossey-Bass, Wiley.
Bearman, M., Dawson, P., Boud, D., Bennett, S., Hall, M., & Molloy, E. (2016). Support forassessment practice: developing the assessment design decisions framework.
Teaching in Higher Education, 21(5), 545–556.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1160217
Black, P., &Wiliam, D. (2003). In praise of educational research: Formative assessment.
British Educational Research Journal, 29 (5), 623–637.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192032000133721
Boitshwarelo, B., Reedy, A., & Billany, T. (2017). Envisioning the use of online tests inassessing twenty-first century learning: a literature review. Research and Practice inTechnology Enhanced Learning. 12, 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-017-0055-7
Burke, L. (2020). As classes move online, some colleges are choosing to go pass/fail torelieve student stress. Is that the right move?
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/03/19/colleges-go-passfail-addresscoronavirus. Accessed 22 November 2020.
Chong, W. (2018). Three paradigms of classroom assessment: Implications for written
feedback research. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(4), 330–347.
https://doi:10.1080/15434303.2017.1405423
Cilliers, J., Schuwirth, W., Adendorff, J., Herman, N., & Van der Vleuten, P. (2010). The
mechanism of impact of summative assessment on medical students'
learning. Advances in health sciences education: theory and practice, 15(5), 695–715.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-010-9232-9
Cilliers, J., Schuwirth, W., Herman, N., Adendorff, J., & Van der Vleuten, P. (2012). A
model of the pre-assessment learning effects of summative assessment in medical
education. Advances in health sciences education: theory and practice, 17(1), 39–53.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-011-9292-5
Crisp, G. (2012). Integrative assessment: reframing assessment practice for current and futurelearning. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(1), 33–43.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2010.494234
Daffin, W., & Jones, A. (2018). Comparing student performance on proctored and nonproctored exams in online psychology courses. Online Learning, 22(1), 131–145.
https://doi-org.ezproxy.hct.ac.ae/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1079

69

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Davis, B., Rand, R., & Seay, R. (2016). Remote proctoring: The effect of proctoring on
grades, Advances in Accounting Education: Teaching and Curriculum Innovations.
Vol. 18), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 23–50. https://doiorg.ezproxy.hct.ac.ae/10.1108/S1085-462220160000018002
Deneen, C. & Boud, D. (2013). Patterns of resistance in managing assessment change.
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(5), 577–591.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.859654
De Villiers, R., Scott-Kennel, J., & Larke, R. (2016). Principles of effective e-assessment: A
proposed framework. Journal of International Business Education, 11, 65–92.
Dixson, D., & Worrell, C. (2016). Formative and summative assessment in the classroom.
Theory into Practice, 55(2), 153–159. https://doi:10.1080/00405841.2016.1148989
Donnelly, C. (2014). The use of case based multiple choice questions for assessing large
group teaching: Implications on student’s learning. Irish Journal of Academic
Practice, 3(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.21427/D7CX32
Guerrero-Roldán, A., & Noguera, I. (2018). A model for aligning assessment withcompetences and learning activities in online courses. The Internet and Higher
Education, 38, 36–46. https://doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.04.005
Hawe, E., & Dixon, H. (2017). Assessment for learning: A catalyst for student selfregulation. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(8), 1181–1192.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1236360
Hylton, K., Levy, Y., & Dringus, P. (2016). Utilizing webcam-based proctoring to deter
misconduct in online exams. Computers & Education, 92–93, 53–63.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.002
Iannone, P., & Simpson, A. (2017). University students' perceptions of summative
assessment: The role of context. Journal of further and Higher Education, 41(6),785–801. https://doi:10.1080/0309877X.2016.1177172
Jaggars, S., & Xu, D. (2016). How do online course design features influence student
performance? Computers and Education, 95, 270–284.
https://doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.014
James, R. (2016). Tertiary student attitudes to invigilated, online summative
examinations. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher
Education, 13(1), 1–13. https://doi:10.1186/s41239-016-0015-0
Joint Information Systems Committee. (2016). Transforming assessment and feedback withtechnology. https://www.jisc.ac.uk/full-guide/transforming-assessment-and-feedback.
Accessed 20 Nov 2020.
Joint Information Systems Committee. (2020). Assessment 2020: what happened – and whatnext? https://www.jisc.ac.uk/news/assessment-2020-what-happened-and-what-next11-jun-2020. Accessed 20 December 2020.
King, C., Guyette, R., & Piotrowski, C. (2009). Online exams and cheating: An empiricalanalysis of business students’ views. The Journal of Educators Online, 6(1), 1–11.
Knight, T. (2002). Summative assessment in higher education: Practices in disarray. Studies
in HEI (Dorchester-on-Thames), 27(3), 275–286.
https://doi:10.1080/03075070220000662

70

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Lau, S. (2016). ‘Formative good, summative bad?’– A review of the dichotomy in assessment
literature. Journal of further and Higher Education, 40(4), 509–525.
https://doi:10.1080/0309877x.2014.984600
Medland, E. (2016). Assessment in higher education: Drivers, barriers and directions forchange in the UK. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(1), 81–96.
https://doi:10.1080/02602938.2014.982072
Mellar, H., Peytcheva-Forsyth, R., Kocdar, S., Karadeniz, A., & Yovkova, B. (2018).
Addressing cheating in e-assessment using student authentication and authorshipchecking systems: Teachers’ perspectives. International Journal for Educational
Integrity, 14(1), 1–21. https://doi:10.1007/s40979-018-0025-x
Okada, A., Noguera, I., Alexieva, L., Rozeva, A., Kocdar, S., Brouns, F., Ladonlahti,T.,
Whitelock, D. &Guerrero‐Roldán, A. (2019). Pedagogical approaches for e‐
assessment with authentication and authorship verification in higher education. British
Journal of Educational Technology, 50(6), 3264–3282. https://doi:10.1111/bjet.12733
Peterson, J. (2016). Formative evaluations in online classes. The Journal of Educators
Online, 13(1). https://doi:10.9743/JEO.2016.1.8
Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. (2018). UK quality code for higher
education advice and guidance, assessments. www.qaa.ac.uk/quality-code.
https://www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaa/quality-code/advice-and-guidanceassessment.pdf?sfvrsn=ca29c181_4. Accessed 20 Dec 2020.
Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. (2020a). COVID-19: Initial guidance forhigher education providers on standards and quality.
https://www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaa/guidance/covid-19-initial-guidance-for-providers.pdf.
Accessed 20 November 2020.
Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. (2020b). COVID-19: Supporting
resources- assessing with integrity in digital delivery.
https://www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaa/guidance/assessing-with-integrity-in-digitaldelivery.pdf. Accessed 20 December 2020.
Ransome, J., & Newton, M. 2018. Are we educating educators about academic integrity? astudy of UK higher education textbooks. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education, 43(1): 126–137. https://doi:10.1080/02602938.2017.1300636
Redecker C., Punie Y., & Ferrari A. (2012). eAssessment for 21st century learning and skills.
In: A. Ravenscroft, S. Lindstaedt, D. Kloos, & D. Hernández-Leo. (Eds.), 21st century
learning for 21st century skills. EC-TEL 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science,
vol 7563. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33263-0_23
Raupach, T., Brown, J., Anders, S., Hasenfuss, G., & Harendza, S. (2013). Summative
assessments are more powerful drivers of student learning than resource intensive
teaching formats. BMC Medicine, 11(1), 61–61. https://doi:10.1186/1741-7015-11-61
Stack, S. (2015). The impact of exam environments on student test scores in online
courses. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 26(3), 273–282.
https://doi:10.1080/10511253.2015.1012173
Stödberg, U. (2012). A research review of e-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education, 37(5), 591–604. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2011.557496

71

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Timmis, S., Broadfoot, P., Sutherland, R., & Oldfield, A. (2016). Rethinking assessment in adigital age: Opportunities, challenges and risks. British Educational Research
Journal, 42(3), 454–476. https://doi:10.1002/berj.3215
Trotter, E. (2006). Student perceptions of continuous summative assessment. Assessment and
Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(5), 505–521.
https://doi:10.1080/02602930600679506
Van de Watering, G., Gijbels, D., Dochy, F., & Van der Rijt, J. (2008). Students’ assessment
preferences, perceptions of assessment and their relationships to study results. Higher
Education, 56(6), 645–658. https://doi:10.1007/s10734-008-9116-6
Williams, B., & Wong, A. (2009). The efficacy of final examinations: A comparative studyof closed-book, invigilated exams and open-book, open-web exams. British Journalof Educational Technology, 40(2), 227–236. https://doi:10.1111/j.14678535.2008.00929.x
Zughoul, O., Momani, F., Almasri, H., Zaidan, A., Zaidan, B., Alsalem, A., Albahri, S.,
Albahri, S., & Hashim, M. (2018). Comprehensive insights into the criteria of student
performance in various educational domains, in IEEE Access, 6, 73245–73264.
https://doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2881282
Corresponding author: Samar El-Farra
Email: selfarra@hct.ac.ae

72Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Appendix
Adjusted Assessments Survey for Faculty Sample Questions
Each item was rated 1. Very dissatisfied, 2. Somewhat dissatisfied, 3. Neutral or neither
dissatisfied nor satisfied, 4. Somewhat satisfied, 5. Very satisfied
Q2: Select the applied assessment tool/s (maximum three)
Assessment tool
Drop down list:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Limited-time assignment (short video, oral
verification)
Open book and take home exams
Online quizzes and assignments
Virtual laboratories
Projects, portfolios, and presentations

E-Delivery Satisfaction Survey – Students
Total of 5 questions, randomly selected from each category, were sent to students.
1. Online Learning Readiness
Availability of online learning resources (computer and internet
service)Communication with other students during the online class
Quality of instructions during the online classYour readiness to use HCT online learning platform (Blackboard
Learn or Zoom)
MyHCT Support when I need support
Quality of network connection during the online class
Dedicated study space where you can read and work on assignments
without distraction
Comfortable to switch on the camera during online class

2. Content Evaluation
The amount of material covered
The quality of the examples presented
Quality of visual and attractive material presented
Your opportunities to ask
The presented content is Interactive
The online course was easy to navigate
The e-lesson was motivating
The variety of presentation methods was used

3. Instructor Delivery Method
The instructor’s accessibility outside of scheduled class time for
additional help
The instructor’s encouragement for students to participate in class73

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

The instructor’s explanation of concepts
The instructor’s feedback
The instructor’s lesson organization
The instructor’s respect for students
The instructor’s use of class time
The instructor’s use of real life examples
The level of instructor’s preparedness for the lesson

4. Overall Experience
Overall experience for this lesson

5. Class Preference
Do you prefer next lesson to be1.
2.

Face to face in classroom
OnlineE-Delivery Satisfaction Survey – Faculty
A total of 5 questions, randomly selected from each category, were sent to Faculty.
1. Online Learning Readiness
Availability of online learning resources
Comfortable to switch on the camera during online class
Impression of student as recipients of online education
My HCT-Support responsiveness when I need support
My System Course Team Leader responsiveness when I needsupportPD quality sufficient to prepare you for online delivery
Quality of network connection during the online class
Quality of student engagement during the online classStudents’ attendanceYour readiness to use HCT online learning platform (Blackboard
Learn or Zoom)

2. Content Evaluation
Interactivity of the presented content
The amount of time for preparation for this online lesson
The extent to which planned topics were covered
The online course was easy to navigate and manage
The quality of student interactions during the lesson
The quality of the examples presented today
The use of adequate presentation methods
Your opportunities to involve students in discussions

3. Instructor Delivery Method
Homework and assignment submission
My use of class time
Polling or tallying student votes to instructor questions
Possibilities of effective and valid online testing
Refer students to additional e-Tutorials

74Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Student’s mature approach to online classStudent’s mutual communication during the class
The students’ respect to instructor
This lesson’s organization
Use of simulations or advanced apps

4. Overall Experience
Overall experience for this lesson

5. Class preference
Do you prefer next lesson to be

3.
4.

75

Face to face in classroom
OnlineSpecial Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

76

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Teaching Practice Online: Challenges in Japan, India and Kenya Under
Pandemic
Per-Olof Hansson
Linköping University
Sweden77

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Abstract
The coronavirus pandemic affected the whole world in 2020, with high pressure on the healthsector, many deaths, reduced business activity, rising unemployment rates, travel restrictions
and social distancing. These developments have had severe consequences for all areas of every
society around the globe. This also includes education. In many countries, primary andsecondary pupils and university students alike were sent home as schools and universities
closed abruptly as part of efforts to control the spread of the virus. As teaching moved online,
learners and teachers were unprepared for the new situation, which posed a unique set ofchallenges. In this context, trainee teachers at a Swedish university were encouraged to support
online teaching at schools in Japan, India and Kenya. The purpose of the digital internship wasthreefold: to continue the trainees’ teaching placements in the absence of opportunities for inclass teaching; to provide an opportunity for trainee teachers to develop their own competence
in online teaching; and to assist the foreign schools in the challenging task of delivering online
classes. This article aims to investigate the challenges faced by pupils in Japanese, Indian and
Kenyan schools and by 27 Swedish trainee teachers during this project. Data collection
consisted of interviews, an online questionnaire, lesson observations, assessment forms, andreports given by trainees. The main challenges identified through our findings included internet
access in host countries, the use of a teacher-centred approach to learning, and difficulty fortrainees to relate to the pupils’ life conditions. However, we conclude that the trainee teachers
increased their global awareness through a climate-friendly alternative to the traditional
teaching placement abroad.
Keywords: COVID-19, challenges, lockdown, online teaching, trainee teachers

78Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

As COVID-19 spread across the world, school activities temporarily shut down, and pupils andstudents were sent home. The United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 4 states there
should be access to quality education for all children, but the United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO, 2020) estimated that 60% of the world’s
student population, 1.5 billion learners in 109 countries, were affected by school and university
closures in March/April 2020. This created tough conditions for children and youth, affecting
their wellbeing and educational future. There is no doubt that school closures will impact
inequalities in education and affect school attainment among pupils and students (Haeck &Lefebvre, 2020).
Learners and teachers were unprepared for the transition to distance learning. Neither learners
nor teachers had sufficient experience of online teaching, despite the common use of computers.
Naidu (2020, p. 425) argues that “the irony is that it has taken a calamity for us to rethink andreengineer our approaches to learning and teaching, despite evidence in favour of the need to
do so, long before COVID-19 struck”. Due to the COVID-19 outbreak, teachers andpupils/students found themselves in a situation where they were compelled to embrace theonline teaching and learning experience (Mishra et al., 2020). However, many teachers wereattempting to understand online teaching for the first time and to source free digital resources
to apply in their teaching. Rouadi and Anouti (2020) found in a study from Lebanon that online
teaching during the pandemic was a failure in many secondary schools. However, it was
successful when teachers used a variety of teaching methods, developed good communication
with learners, and encouraged active participation during lessons.
There are, therefore, challenges to implementing online teaching: pedagogical, technical andsocial (Hansson, 2015). Firstly, a pedagogical challenge is introducing digital tools in formal
education when teachers have limited experience of online teaching and pupils have limited
digital competence. Digital devices may be frequently used outside school, but many pupils
lack experience of use in an educational setting. Another pedagogical challenge is moving fromteacher-centred to learner-centred approaches, with the purpose of engaging the student andencouraging active participation in learning. Studies show that learners prefer, and are moreengaged by, blended learning (a combination of traditional classroom teaching and online
educational materials) rather than a fully online learning approach (Crichton & Onguko, 2013;
Wanner & Palmer, 2015). This has led researchers to investigate what people learn in“knowledge-rich environments”, of which online teaching can be considered an example(Hansson, 2015).
Secondly, technical challenges concern the use of an appropriate mobile device and the cost ofinternet access. Digital and mobile technologies have great potential to support learning becauseof being ubiquitous, reliable, cheap, and both social and personal (Royle et al., 2014). The
learners can move between content and context. It offers flexibility and students canaccordingly learn at any time and any place. Thus, “learners will be able to seamless start alesson in school, continue the lesson on the bus, and complete the learning at home” (Ramnath& Kuriakose, 2015, p. 659). However, learners in low- and middle-income countries may facebarriers to digital learning such as network failures, lack of power and lack of access to theInternet (Crichton & Onguko, 2013; Hansson & Jobe, 2014). Escueta et al. (2020) point out that
despite expanding access to technology, the digital divide is increasing. Further, even “whendisadvantaged students can access technology, they may lack the guidance needed for
productive utilisation - a ‘digital-use divide’” (Escueta et al., 2020, p. 898).

79Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Rasheed et al. (2020) argue that the main challenges for teachers in distance learning are theuse of technology and the selection of appropriate instructional technology. Therefore, proper
techniques and learning support should be provided to teachers as well as to students (Dhawan,2020). However, teachers have been found to show resistance to using new technology forteaching (Rasheed et al., 2020). Lenkaitis et al. (2020) suggest that teacher training programmes
should integrate virtual exchange opportunities with international partners, which have beenhighlighted as even more valuable during the COVID-19 crisis.
Thirdly, social challenges include a lack of familiarity with and ability to use digital and mobile
technology. Digital skills need to be improved, particularly in low-income countries. In
addition, gender must be considered: worldwide girls have fewer educational opportunities, andsecondary school completion rate is in favour of boys (Singh & Mukherjee, 2020). Moreover,as Dhawan (2020) points out:
We cannot ignore and forget the students who do not have access to all online
technology. These students are less affluent and belong to less tech-savvy
families with financial resources restrictions; therefore, they may lose out
when classes occur online. They may lose out because of the heavy costs
associated with digital devices and internet data plans (p. 17).
The project examined in this study takes an approach that is different from many otherinternational collaborations, where one party tends to be more interested than the other. Westerncountries often seek collaborations with partners in low-income countries where the exchange
occurs in one direction: for example, Western participants travel to the low-income setting. The
project studied here began with a request from local schools in low-, middle- and high-income
countries to a Swedish teacher training programme to support their online teaching and mitigate
the impact of school closures. Concurrently, the Swedish university was searching foropportunities to develop trainee teachers’ online teaching skills; it was therefore a perfectmatch.
The purpose of this study is to investigate teaching placement online under lockdown. The
research question is: What are the challenges involved in online learning for pupils in Japanese,
Indian and Kenyan schools and for Swedish trainee teachers? The next section describes the
background to the project, followed by the methodology of the study including settings, target
groups, data collection and data analysis. Thereafter, findings are presented, followed bycategorisation and analysis of results. The paper concludes with the discussion, limitations,conclusion and key recommendations for future research.
Background
In March 2020, when the university in Sweden moved from campus teaching to online, it wasa challenge for the Department of Education to continue with teaching placements as part ofteacher training courses. However, following requests for assistance from three schools inJapan, India and Kenya, respectively, a digital internship module of 7.5 European Credit
Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) was created. The internship period was five weeks
in June and July 2020. The application period for the placement was short, which meant limited
preparation time for prospective participants. Five students (three male and two female) were
accepted. Before the placement started, the university arranged two digital seminars covering
the educational systems of the different countries, life conditions, the United Nations’ Agenda
2030 for sustainable development, cultural context, ethics, prerequisites and practicalities. After

80

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

digital meetings with directors, headmasters and supervisors, the internship was organized. A
second group of trainee teachers were admitted for an online teaching placement abroad in
November 2020 and January/February 2021. This second group of 22 students (9 male and 13
female) conducted their placement at primary and secondary level in India and Kenya for 3-5
weeks.
The participating schools were located in Nara (Japan), Bangalore (India) and Nairobi (Kenya),representing high-, middle- and low-income countries, respectively. In Japan, two trainees wereplaced at a secondary school. English was the only subject accepted. In India, four trainees
taught all subjects at a primary school, one trainee taught French in upper primary, and six
trainees taught Social Science at a secondary school. In Kenya, two trainees taught Mathematics
and Biology, and 12 taught Social Science (History & Government according to the Kenyan
syllabus), all at a secondary school. The Swedish trainees were all in the third year of theirteacher training, except for one student who was already working as a teacher but did not yet
have a certificate.
Table 1: Overview of selected schools and placements
Country/city

School level

Placement

Trainee teacher(s)Japan/Nara

SecondaryForm 1–3

2 maleEnglishIndia/Bangalore

Primary
Upper primary/Secondary
Secondary

Grade 2-5
Grade 7–8
Grade 10-11
Form 3–4
Form 1-2

2 male/2 female
1 male1 male/5 female
2 female
6 male/6 femaleAll
FrenchSocial Science
Maths/Biology
Social Science

Kenya/Nairobi

Subject

Prerequisites
The participating schools were private, and teaching was based on the national syllabus andcurriculum. The Japanese school was a girls’ school and the others were mixed. The Japaneseand Indian schools charged fees, whereas the school in Kenya did not, as it served
disadvantaged youth. The total number of pupils in the schools was 700 in Nara, 900 in
Bangalore and 300 in Nairobi. Class sizes were 40+ in Nara, 20+ in Bangalore and 30+ in
Nairobi. In general, all pupils had limited experience of digital learning before this project. In
terms of technology, the Japanese pupils had their own laptops and/or tablets, internet accessand use of a digital school platform. The Indian pupils used their own computers or mobile
phones with internet access and Google Classroom as a learning management system (LMS).
The Kenyan pupils used tablets with internet access provided by the school and a locallydesigned digital platform called “The Big Blue Button” to access educational material.
MethodA mixed-method approach was used for data collection, consisting of lesson observations, an
online questionnaire, semi-structured interviews, assessment forms, and trainees’ oral andwritten reports (see Table 2).
Lesson observations were followed by a 30-minute digital meeting to discuss the lesson, pupils’
activity, the teacher’s role, challenges encountered, and so forth. The online questionnaire
consisted of 18 questions using a Likert scale where the pupils were asked to agree or disagreewith a series of statements. A five-point scale was used, ranging from 1 = not at all to 5 = yes,81Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

absolutely. The pupils also had the opportunity to add responses in their own words. In total,
56 questionnaires were collected from the pupils after having been distributed in the first phaseof the project (July 2020).
Table 2: Overview of data collection
MethodLesson observation
Online questionnaire
Interview
Assessment form
Oral & written reportJapan
2 lessons of 40 min
33
2 x 50 min
2
2

India
5 lessons of 60 min
12
1 x 50 min
11
11

Kenya
4 lessons of 50 min
11
4 x 45 min
14
14

Online interviews were conducted with all five trainee teachers from the first group and two
students from the placement in November a few weeks after teaching was completed. The
trainees on placement in January/February 2021 had only just finished the internship at the timeof writing, and it was therefore not possible to include interviews with them. The semistructured interviews were guided by themes and questions. Each interview took the form of aconversation, rather than simply ticking off questions from a list, although in every interview
the same questions were asked. Each interview lasted 45-50 minutes and was recorded andtranscribed. An assessment form containing open and closed questions was submitted by thetrainees’ supervisors. Finally, oral and written reports were given by the trainee teachers.
EthicsThe participants were informed about the study and were given the opportunity to consent toparticipation. The data material was anonymised and coded, and only the researcher had accessto the material. All results are presented in an anonymised way so that no individual can be
identified. Nevertheless, transparency and communication with the participants are ofimportance. Online education leaves digital footprints which constitute sensitive informationand privacy can easily be violated, thus personal data must be handled with confidentiality.
Consequently, pseudonyms were created for the participants to maintain their anonymity.
Data Analysis
The analysis is based on both quantitative and qualitative data with the aim of taking a holistic
perspective. Rich data and systematic search for categories are at the core of qualitative content
analysis, and important are a reduction of data and systematisation (Schreier, 2014). Therefore,
Bryman’s (2015) four stages of analysis were used. Firstly, the transcribed interviews were readas a whole and notes were taken. Secondly, the text was labelled and systematically coded.
Thirdly, codes were reduced, and interviews compared and categorised. Fourthly, codes andcategories were related to the research question and relevant studies. Thereafter, online
questionnaires were compared, and notes taken about the responses, which were related to theinterviews and categorised. Finally, notes from lesson observations, comments from assessment
forms, and notes from trainees’ reports were related to the other data and included in the
categorisation. The analysis of the empirical data produced three categories: technical,
pedagogical and social challenges. In addition, there is a category of trainee teachers’
experiences.

82

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Findings
In this section, the results from the different methods of data collection are presented undermain categories, illustrated with extracts from interviews and reports together with quantitative
data from the online questionnaire and pupils’ comments.
Pupils, trainees and supervisors reported uniformly that they were not used to online teaching
before this project. The teachers started in-service training to receive hands-on material of
online teaching, alongside teaching their pupils under lockdown. As one trainee teacher put it,… so we kind of learned together. Both the pupils, teachers, and me. At thesame time (Interview, female trainee teacher).
Japan
In the first week of the internship (early June 2020), all Japanese pupils were at home, with
their regular teachers providing live teaching through Zoom. The trainee teachers observed
lessons. From the second week onwards, the pupils resumed school attendance. Face masks
were mandatory, which presented a significant challenge to conducting English language
teaching. The Swedish trainees were now responsible for the lessons, and the pupils were all inclass together with two of their regular English teachers. The Swedish trainees, who attended
via video link and were displayed in the classroom via a projector, instructed the pupils via theregular teachers, and pupils completed exercises individually or in groups. The Swedish trainee
gave oral and written examples in English and used the webcam to illustrate the content withbody language, and the local teachers asked the pupils in Japanese to respond back to thetrainee. The pupils presented their assignments in front of the webcam directly to the Swedish
trainee teacher.
India
The pupils were at home using their computers or mobile phones to access Google Meet for
distance learning. The Swedish trainee teacher conducted the lesson supervised by a local
teacher. All pupils had their webcams on for the whole lesson. Pupils shared their screens whenpresenting their homework, and used the chat feature to ask questions or make comments, forexample “This was easy”. During the project period in June and July 2020, the Indian
government gradually revised its policy on digital education. This was confusing for theteachers due to numerous changes being made and affected online teaching when pupils’ screen
time was reduced. The government introduced a maximum of 1.5 hours per day in front of ascreen, with pupils working on individual assignments for the rest of the school day. The policychanged again while the second trainee teacher group was active to allow only 30 minutes at
the time followed by a break. Pupils then spent half the school day online.
Kenya
All pupils were from disadvantaged communities in various parts of Kenya, to which they weresent home when the day- and boarding school closed. The pupils in Forms 3 and 4 were thenequipped with tablets but had no previous experience of using them. While waiting for the newtablets to be delivered, some pupils in Form 3 used borrowed mobile phones to access theeducational material. The content was uploaded by teachers and/or Swedish trainee teachers on
the Big Blue Button platform. This was an LMS with an integrated video tool (similar to Zoom)
for live teaching, a digital whiteboard to illustrate lesson content, a screen-sharing facility toshow PowerPoint presentations, and pupils could ask questions either orally or by using thechat feature. The Kenyan pupils did not use their video cameras at all, due to poor bandwidth.

83

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

In January 2021, the pupils were back in class using tablets when trainee teachers conducted
their online lessons.
Technical Challenges
Teachers were accustomed to using WhatsApp in day-to-day life. Under lockdown, the teachers
used WhatsApp and telephone to discuss teaching material and to check on the students. Thiswas in particular important in Kenya, where pupils returned to their hometowns in often remoterural locations with limited internet connectivity and interrupted power supply. In Bangalore
and Nara, WhatsApp was a reliable tool used to communicate with pupils, but from an earlystage in the project schools used their LMS because they were already integrated in teaching
and learning. Nonetheless, the LMS were a challenge at all schools in this project. Both pupils
and trainee teachers experienced difficulties accessing the school learning platforms, withinterrupted internet links and poor internet connection being the main explanations. Table 3
shows the technical difficulties experienced by pupils at the different schools.
Table 3: Pupils’ technical challenges
Internet access
Lack of power
Problems accessing
the platform
None
Total no. of pupils

Japan
16
4
3

India
5
1
0

Kenya
5
4
1

10
33

6
12

1
11

A major problem for the pupils (26 of 56, or 46%) at all three schools was accessing the Internet.
The survey does not identify the frequency of such difficulties, whether they occurred all thetime or only occasionally, but according to the trainee teachers it was a common problem. This
meant that pupils could be in and out during a lesson. Thus, a challenge not depending on if thepupil were in a low-, middle- or high-income country. In the Kenyan pupils’ case, they received
data bundles (Internet time) from the school administration, and these did not cover the whole
period (monthly). Other pupils relied on Wi-Fi. Lack of power was frequently a concern forJapanese pupils, due to learners spending many hours in front of screens and forgetting tocharge the device. Difficulties with power were also apparent for Kenyan pupils, but this wasusually related to power shortages in their rural home locations. Technical issues led to highrates of absence among Kenyan pupils. For example, a lesson observed in Form 4 had 10 pupils
present out of a class of 54. Students attending had their video cameras switched off to ensure
a better connection. Overall, 30% of all pupils had no technical challenges at all.
Kenyan pupils who used a mobile phone, which usually belonged to a parent, encounteredchallenges in sharing the device. For example, one Kenyan pupil said: “I am using my mother’smobile phone, and sometimes she doesn’t stay at home during my study time, so I miss theclasses”. Other challenges occurring at the three schools included pupils forgetting to mute theirmicrophones, which led to unwanted background noise; problems sharing screens whenaccessing lessons on a mobile phone; and pupils pretending to have technical issues when theteacher asked a question that was too difficult. On the other hand, pupils sometimes complainedof difficulties in the other direction: “We can’t hear the teacher or see him due to technicalproblems” (Indian pupil). According to the trainee teachers, the Japanese pupils were used tousing digital tools and showed digital competence, but they also had problems accessing theInternet (16 of 33, or 48%). Additionally, trainee teachers faced difficulties when sharing84

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

screens on the local platform because it was then not possible to see the chat, where pupils
frequently asked questions or informed the lecturer that they could not see the shared screen orhear the teacher.
Pedagogical Challenges
The Swedish trainee teachers sometimes had difficulties understanding whether all the pupils
were following the lesson properly. One female trainee stated:
I do not know how much they understood. It was the hardest thing for me toknow.
This was especially difficult when pupils’ microphones and cameras were turned off, and thelatter occurred frequently with the Kenyan pupils due to low bandwidth. All online teaching
was live, and another common issue was pupils forgetting to mute their microphones, whichbrought in background noise – for instance from siblings, neighbours, chickens or motorbikes.
Kenyan pupils in particular stated that they experienced a disruptive environment. The pupils
themselves sometimes disturbed the lesson as well, and in some cases used the chat function tobully other pupils. On the one hand, the pupils sometimes took advantage of the digital setting.
One male trainee teacher said:
I ask if a pupil can answer and then the pupil’s internet collapses. Or thecamera is not working. But if he or she wants to ask me something, the camera
works perfectly and there is no internet problem.
On the other hand, the trainees noticed by observing the regular teachers that they sometimes
did not give the pupils time to respond.
The pupils have learned that if they wait 2-3 seconds, the teacher will givethe answer (Interview, male trainee).
Additionally, some Japanese pupils argued they had problems concentrating, thus difficulties
with the subject content in the online environment. An explanation of this, according to thetrainees and supervisors, is that the combination of online teaching and English as a subject was
too difficult for the Japanese pupils. However, teaching was generally considered to be relevant
and interesting. According to pupils, the overall grade for online teaching provided by thetrainees was a mean 4.19 (out of 5). Pupils considered the teaching approach to be at a levelsuited to the pupils’ knowledge, and the content was considered not too difficult (mean 2.93)
and relevant for the learning objectives (mean 3.82). According to the pupils, the effort required
to follow the teaching was medium (61%) or high (31%). Active participation and interaction
between pupils occurred during lessons. One Indian pupil said: “We watched a lot of interactive
videos and did a lot of fun activities”. Thus, overall, the pupils felt positively about the teachingfrom abroad (mean 3.35), and found lessons both different and interesting.
Some pupils stated that they had difficulty understanding because the trainees had a different(as in Swedish) accent when speaking English, and recommended that they speak more slowly.
Vice versa, trainees initially had difficulty understanding the English spoken by pupils andsupervisors. Nonetheless, the atmosphere was supportive: “Everyone was given an equalchance, and politely corrected when someone made a mistake” (Indian pupil). Pupils felt they
developed skills (for example, language skills): “It was very easy to understand even in online

85

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

classes” (Japanese pupil). One Kenyan pupil expressed his approval of the trainee teacher via
the online questionnaire as follows: “Keep it up #$"”.
Social Challenges
The trainee teachers reported that it was a challenge to relate to the pupils in the digital
environment. To be able to move between formal and informal engagement is important tocreate rapport with learners and sustain interest and motivation. One supervisor from India
commented: “He (the trainee teacher) didn’t get an opportunity to explore this as the internshipwas online” (assessment form). Thus, the social skills objectives as part of the teacher training
were problematic to fulfill. In addition, a Kenyan supervisor writes:
NN [trainee] demonstrated an ability to change the way she communicates,
based on conscious social and pedagogical considerations of the Kenyan
students. NN joined us under unprecedented circumstances. We weregrappling with finding our way with online teaching. She was quick to thinkon her feet when assigned lessons. She fashioned the lessons very
independently such that they did not need much adjustment. (Assessment
form)
The Swedish trainees said that teaching was made difficult due to limited possibilities for using
body language, which limited his modes of expression and available ways of explaining thecontent. The trainees had no previous knowledge of the pupils nor their background, life
conditions, and so on. Interviews and written reports from trainees reveal difficulties
pronouncing pupils’ names, or even knowing whether the name displayed on the screen was afirst name or a surname, due to cultural differences. Additionally, it was sometimes difficult for
the trainees to know whether a pupil was male or female from their name alone. During theinternship, trainees deepened their knowledge about their host country by reading about theculture, traditions, food, and so on, and/or by interviewing the supervisor about the pupils’ life
situations. These investigations allowed them to adapt their teaching practice to the context inwhich the pupils lived. For example, the Kenyan supervisor pointed out that pupils weresometimes required by their families to do small jobs to receive a daily income, and were
therefore absent from class at certain times.
Trainees’ Experience
The trainee teachers reported limited experience of online teaching prior to the placement; only
theory of digitalisation had been discussed during the teacher training programme. Trainees
understood the importance of online teaching aids, flipped classroom, and so forth, andappreciated the opportunity to practice. One female trainee said in an interview:
I think I have learned more in this practice than in any other practice.
Because it has been so intensive, and I have had to learn so much. Technical,
cultural, and I had to teach […] the usual in teaching practice plus morecomponents. So, it has been very intense mentally even though it has been 12 lessons a day.
The trainees increased their self-confidence and learned to be flexible and take the initiative.
This was particularly apparent when, for example, the network of regular teachers failed, andthe trainee suddenly had to step in as class teacher. For the most part, the different time zones
did not pose a great challenge, but in the case of the Japanese school, trainees had to wake up

86

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

at 04.30 am to start teaching and sometimes found it challenging to motivate, inspire and engage
the pupils in the lesson.
Trainees cited varied reasons for participating in the internship. The main reason was wanting
to help out the participating schools under lockdown, followed by a desire to develop their own
digital teaching competence. Trainees stated they would not have applied for face-to-faceteaching abroad, which the university regularly offers as a summer course. Reasons for not
applying for such courses were lack of time, fear of flying, and considering it more important
to develop their digital competence. However, following the online placement, trainees showed
an interest in undertaking teaching practice in selected countries the following year due tohaving been well-received by the host schools and supervisors. This interest in bothglobalisation and digitalisation developed steadily during the digital internship according to theinitial digital seminars, and trainees’ oral and written reports.
Discussion
This study explores the challenges faced by three schools in three different countries in thetransition from face-to-face teaching in classrooms to fully online teaching, which presented a
totally new learning situation for both teachers and pupils. The implementation of online
teaching regarding organisational, technical and pedagogical aspects was not thoroughly
planned by the schools before they started their online programmes. In addition, there was
uncertainty from governments, and their guidelines and policies changed from month to month.
For instance, in July 2020 the Indian government significantly reduced pupils’ screen time toencourage reading and study in the traditional way (i.e., textbooks). This may have been
motivated by concern that pupils might simply copy text from the Internet, and that teachers
would have little insight into learners’ experience. Thus, this requires a mind change if fulllearning potential is to be achieved. The findings of this study show that the main challenge
encountered in online learning was not the technology itself, even if the pupils had difficulties
with insufficient networks and internet access, but rather teaching methods and pedagogicalapproach (see Escueta et al., 2020; Hansson, 2015; Rouadi & Anouti, 2020).
The pedagogical approach taken by trainees was initially mainly teacher centred. A typicallesson consisted of a trainee giving a lecture by sharing PowerPoint slides, or a pre-recorded
video lecture. The pupils were then passive participants, and understandably found the lessons
rather monotonous. According to the questionnaire, the pupils suggested that teaching be mademore fun and delivered with a smile. The Swedish trainee teachers then faced the same dilemmaas the local teachers in the schools. Together, teachers on both sides gradually moved towards
a different approach, learning about the technology and attempting to blend pedagogy to create
more interactive and personalised instructional videos. In some subjects they offered digitaltextbooks, this can be a development aspect to integrate at larger scale in the school platform.
Three of the trainees in the first group were teaching foreign languages in Indian and Japanese
schools. The pupils stated clearly that they found language learning difficult and therefore they
were less motivated. The main social challenge for all the trainees was a lack of understandingof the pupils’ context, background, life conditions, and so on. The trainees had been given somerelevant information by the course coordinator and supervisors, but as outsiders theirunderstanding remained limited, particularly in terms of relating to a poor setting such as Kenya
when coming from a high-income country like Sweden. The trainees also pointed out that inface-to-face teaching, it is possible to use body language and eye contact, to chat with pupils
before and after lessons, and so forth. In the online setting, there was a lack of opportunity to87

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

build social relationships, which trainees considered to have a negative effect on learning.
Consequently, there is a need for more and other forms of interaction – for instance, throughWhatsApp or Facebook Messenger. However, in general, the pupils were satisfied with theteaching provided by trainees. An Indian pupil concluded: “The foreign teacher gave me a wider
perspective on the cultures and lifestyles of those in several countries.”
Recommendations
Innovation and emergent technology optimism are not enough to ensure quality in online
education. There are other aspects to consider such as infrastructure, teachers’ digitalcompetence, and the relationships between online resources and learners. Rasheed et al. (2020)and Lenkaitis et al. (2020) point out that an important question in teacher training is how toprovide effective online activities for trainees. Trainee teachers have criticised teacher training
programmes as being too theoretical when it comes to digitalisation. The digital internship wasa capacity-building project, helping to equip trainees with 21st-century skills and foster lifelong
learning. It is important for trainees, and pupils, to develop digital literacy, which encompasses
skills to access, synthesise, analyse, interpret and critically evaluate information (Kong, 2014).
The trainee teachers in this project developed new perspectives on both the Swedish education
system and those of other countries. The trainees increased their global awareness and received
new pedagogical ideas about how to integrate digital learning in normal teaching. Further, thisinternship reached trainee teachers who would not normally have participated in mobility
programmes. Trainees have a clear interest in globalisation, but their mobility is limited forvarious reasons, and it is of importance that trainees still receive global exposure regardless.
Online teaching placements are a cost-effective and climate-friendly solution to improve traineeteachers’ skills.
The online internship can be scaled up to groups of trainees who can teach abroad when it issuitable both for them and for selected schools. With this said, schools and teachers havelearned from the experience to be better prepared for online teaching in the event of a future
pandemic or similar disruption.
Limitations
Like any small-scale qualitative study, this research has limitations. The study is limited to threeschools in three different countries with a limited number of trainee teachers, andgeneralisability has yet to be examined in other contexts and cultures. Another notable
shortcoming is that not all objectives (social and pedagogical) for a teacher training placement
have been examined; nor is there scope in the current article to identify the qualities andbehaviours of supervisors.
Conclusion
The coronavirus pandemic that began in 2020 has affected the whole world and will continue
to have consequences on a number of sectors for an unforeseen period of time, including
education. When national lockdowns came into effect, the schools in this study mobilised
quickly to transition from classroom teaching to online teaching. The teachers and pupils hadvery limited experience of digital tools or online teaching. Three schools in Japan, India and
Kenya asked for support from trainee teachers in Sweden, who themselves had limited practicalexperience of online teaching. This study presents challenges and learning experiences fromonline teaching both under lockdown and when pupils had just resumed school attendance.
While technical challenges were numerous, such as access to the Internet, the key concern at

88

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

all three schools related to pedagogical approaches. Pupils came from different socio-economic
backgrounds, while teachers applied one and the same pedagogical approach, and there wereshortcomings in the understanding of individual differences. In the online environment,teachers and trainees found it difficult to know whether pupils were active and had a goodunderstanding of lesson content. On the other hand, pupils often found online lectures to be lessmotivating. Subsequently, the trainee teachers encouraged active participation and interaction,
which was well-received by the pupils. Thus, a shift took place towards a learner-centred
approach which was flexible and provided pupils with a variety of learning choices to makelearning useful, exciting and motivating. There are small but important steps to be taken in thewake of the pandemic for developing quality in online education.

89

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

References
Bryman, A. (2015). Social research methods (5 ed.). Oxford University Press.
Crichton, S., & Onguko, B. (2013). Appropriate technologies for challenging contexts. In W.
Kinuthia & S. Marshall (Eds.) On the move: Mobile learning for development (pp.
25–41). Information Age Publishing.
Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of
Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 5–22.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520934018
Escueta, M., Nickow, A. J., Oreopoulos, P., & Quan, V. (2020). Upgrading education withtechnology: Insights from experimental research. Journal of Economic
Literature, 58(4), 897–996. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20191507
Haeck, C., & Lefebvre, P. (2020). Pandemic school closures may increase inequality in testscores. Canadian Public Policy, 46(1), S82–S87.
https://doi.org/10.3138/cpp.2020-055
Hansson, P-O. (2015). New ways of learning: Participatory action research and Kenyan
runners’ appropriation of smartphones to improve their daily lives and participation in
m-learning. Diss., Studies in Behavioural Studies no 189. Linköping: Linköping
University.
Hansson, P-O., & Jobe, W. (2014). Frontrunners in ICTL: Kenyan runners’ improvement in
training, informal learning and economic opportunities using smartphones.
International Journal of Education & Development using ICT, 10(4), 4–20.
Kong, S. C. (2014). Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills throughdomain knowledge learning in digital classrooms: An experience of practicing flippedclassroom strategy. Computers & Education, 78, 160–173.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.009
Lenkaitis, C. A., Hilliker, S. M., & Roumeliotis, K. (2020). Teacher candidate reflection anddevelopment through virtual exchange. IAFOR Journal of Education: Technology in
Education, 8(2), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.22492/ije.8.2.07
Mishra, L., Gupta, T., & Shree, A. (2020). Online teaching-learning in higher education
during lockdown period of COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of
Educational Research Open, 2(8), 100012.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2020.100012
Naidu, S. (2020). It is the worst - and the best - of times! Distance Education, 41(4), 425–428.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1825929
Ramnath, R., and Kuriakose, A., (2015). Mobile technologies for teaching and learning. In Y.
Zhang (Ed.) Handbook of mobile teaching and learning, (pp. 645–662). Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54146-9_35
Rasheed, R. A., Kamsin, A., & Abdullah, N. A. (2020). Challenges in the online componentof blended learning: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 144, 103701, 1–
17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103701
Rouadi, N. E., & Anouti, M. F. (2020). The online learning experiment in the intermediateand secondary schools in Lebanon during the coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis.
International Journal of Advanced Research in Science, Engineering and Technology,
7(7), 14466–14485. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01307-w

90Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Royle, K., Stager, S., & Traxler, J. (2014). Teacher development with mobiles: Comparative
critical factors. Prospects, 44, 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-013-9292-8
Singh, R., & Mukherjee, P. (2018). ‘Whatever she may study, she can’t escape from washingdishes’: gender inequity in secondary education – evidence from a longitudinal study
in India. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 48(2),262–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2017.1306434
Schreier, M. (2014). Qualitative content analysis. In U., Flick (Ed.) The SAGE handbook ofqualitative data analysis (pp. 170–183). Sage.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446282243.n12
Wanner, P., & Palmer, E. (2015). Personalising learning: Exploring student and teacher
perceptions about flexible learning and assessment in a flipped university course.
Computers & Education, 88, 354–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.07.008
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) (2020).
#LearningNeverStops. COVID-19 education response.
https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse/globalcoalition Accessed 8th ofAugust, 2020.
Corresponding author: Per-Olof Hansson
Email: per-olof.hansson@liu.se91

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

92Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Motivating Online Learning through Project-Based Learning During the2020 COVID-19 Pandemic
Avneet Hira
Boston College,
Massachusetts, USA
Emma Anderson
Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Massachusetts, USA

93

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Abstract
The transition of traditional schooling to online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic
disrupted formal school education. Though at home, teachers and students continued teaching
and learning in socially distant ways using online technologies. From various teacher surveys,
only about 60% of students in the United States regularly engaged with learning activities.
Teachers and parents also expressed a significant need for help to keep students motivated andengaged in learning activities. During the pandemic, online learning left teachers and parents
needing support for learning activities that motivate and engage students. Project-basedlearning is an increasingly popular pedagogical practice centered around students working
collaboratively on projects while the teacher facilitates learning activities and progression.
Project-based learning embodies several factors considered central to motivation in online
learning. In this paper, we inquire how this approach presents itself as a candidate for learning
during the pandemic when considering students’ motivation to learn through online learning
experiences. We construct a conceptual framework informed by motivational theories thatshare core tenets with this form of learning and use the framework to analyze interviews of 11
teachers from 4 schools that taught with a project-based learning approach before the pandemic
and transitioned to teaching, using it online, in the Spring of 2020. From our analyses of theteachers’ narratives, we discuss teaching aspects of the approach that lend themselves well toonline teaching, elements that the teachers believe are missing, and how educators might caterto these missing aspects with a focus on student motivation to learn.
Keywords: COVID-19, motivation, online learning, project-based learning

94

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted traditional school education. Physical school facilities
were shut down, but school education was expected to continue. This disruption created a wide
range of schooling, from photocopied packets being mailed home to video conferenceclassrooms. Unlike other disasters like hurricanes and tornadoes where schooling is
temporarily paused, the COVID-19 pandemic forced physical school facilities to close, butteachers were expected to continue socially distant teaching using technology. This is
attributable to a confluence of factors unique to the current time, comprising broader access tocomputers and internet than ever before (Child Trends, 2018), availability of technologies foronline teaching and learning (Emmanuel, 2018; Meticulous Research, 2020; Wan, 2019), andthe unique constraints of the pandemic wherein students, as long as socially distant, can stayhome and continue learning.
However, learning from home did not result in the same teaching and learning experience forteachers and students as before the pandemic. From various teacher surveys, only about 60%
of students in the United States regularly engaged with learning activities (Educators for
Excellence, 2020; Kraft & Simon, 2020). These numbers are difficult to report by districts andstates, as no standard metric or definition for student engagement during the pandemic has been
agreed upon yet (Barnum & Bryan, 2020). Student engagement was divided across race andsocioeconomic status lines, where teachers of students of color and those belonging to lowincome groups reported lower student engagement in learning compared to other groups(Gewertz, 2020). Irrespective of student background, teachers and parents expressed asignificant need for help to keep students motivated and engaged in learning activities. 44.6%
of teachers from a recent RAND study (Hamilton et al., 2020) reported needing help withstrategies for keeping students engaged and motivated, and 53% of parents in a National
Parents Union survey (Echelon Insights, 2020) indicated needing help with engaging theirchildren in good activities.
This transition to online teaching, a phenomenon that we refer to as social distance teaching
and learning (Anderson & Hira, 2020), disrupted formal education, leaving teachers andparents needing support for learning activities that motivate and engage students. In this paper,
we explore how teachers who use project-based learning (PBL) were able or unable to motivate
their students to learn during social distance learning. We first construct a conceptual
framework informed by motivational theories that share core tenets with PBL, and then analyze
interviews of 11 teachers from 4 schools that transitioned to teaching using PBL online in thespring of 2020. From our analyses of the teachers’ narratives, we discuss PBL teaching aspects
that lend themselves well to online social distance teaching, aspects that the teachers believe
are missing, and how educators might cater to these missing aspects with a particular focus on
student motivation to learn.
Literature Review
Project-based learning, true to its name, uses projects for teaching and learning. Projects
provide students with opportunities to be central in their learning, work autonomously over agiven period of time with facilitation from the teacher, collaborate and cooperate to researchand create projects, and reflect on their learning individually and as teams (Bell, 2010;
Blumenfeld et al., 1991; Thomas, 2000). Through PBL, students work on relatively complex
and advanced problems that are authentic in context. Learning is grounded in explicit
educational goals (Moursund, 1999), often including lifelong learning (Diehl et al., 1999).

95

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Theoretically, PBL is grounded in constructivist and constructionist educational theory,
wherein learners construct knowledge based on their experiences and prior knowledge (Piaget,1970) and mediated by their interaction with artifacts (Papert, 1980; Papert & Harel, 1991).
Savery and Duffy (2001) claim PBL to be one of the best exemplars of constructivist learning.
PBL has been shown to produce a better attitude towards learning and higher academic
achievement (Baş, 2011; C. Chen & Yang, 2019) compared to traditional instruction andtextbook-based teaching. Students are motivated to pursue nontrivial problems by genuinely
engaging with them (Blumenfeld et al., 1991). Ideally, PBL in practice is scaffolded to meet
appropriate learner goals, supports teachers and students to enact effective teaching andlearning, includes formative reflective and peer evaluations, promotes both collaborative work
and individual student ownership and agency (B. J. S. Barron et al., 1998; Kokotsaki et al.,2016; Svihla & Reeve, 2016). In synthesis, PBL places student autonomy and agency at thecenter of the learning process, takes place in socially connected settings, develops individual
students’ abilities and skills, and the projects are relevant and interesting to the students.
Many studies exploring PBL and online learning have focused on how online tools like cloudcomputing and online forums can help facilitate PBL pedagogy. Studies have found that cloudcomputing or collaborative online tools such as the Google suite or Office365 are valuable
tools for facilitating PBL (Çakiroğlu & Erdemir, 2019; Sutia et al., 2019). Ching and Hsu(2013) concluded that peer feedback encouraged student participation and learning in online
PBL assignments. Others have explored student group dynamics in the online environment.
Yilmaz et al. (2020) investigated how different online group dynamics comprising vertical andshared responsibility are both effective in completing PBL assignments. While prior work on
online PBL provides relevant grounding for this paper, it is essential to note that our study issituated in a time when teachers abruptly moved to remote teaching or what we have termedsocial distance learning. Most prior work in the area has focused on intentionally designed
online PBL experiences, whereas during the shift to online teaching during the pandemic,
schools and administrators did not have the time to deeply think through and implement any
major redesigns mid-semester. Thus, we report on this unique maneuver that many teachers
across the world were expected to perform.
Conceptual Framework
To understand relevant motivational factors that play a role in effective online PBL, we form
a conceptual framework by synthesizing tenets of relevant motivation theories, namely, selfdetermination theory (SDT) (Deci & Ryan, 1985), achievement goal theory (AGT) (Nicholls,
1984; Pintrich, 2000b; Senko et al., 2011), and the role of interest in learning and development(Renninger et al., 1992). Below we explain how these theories aid understanding motivation tolearn in PBL settings.
According to Deci and Ryan (1985, 2000), individuals’ self-determination towards various
tasks is promoted by their experience of achieving the psychological needs of autonomy,competence, and relatedness. Autonomy refers to an individual’s sense of agency in a given
situation, competence refers to an individual’s capability to carry out a task, and relatedness isthe quality of connecting with others. SDT has also been used as a theory to understandmotivation in online learning environments (Hartnett, 2016). Unsurprisingly when students aresupported in their autonomy, competence, and relatedness to learning, students improve inthese three psychological areas, in turn favorably affecting their self-determination to learn in
online settings (K. Chen & Jang, 2010). Kim and Frick (2011) reported that perceived relevanceand competence to use technology, in addition to age, were the best predictors of learners’

96Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

motivation to begin self-directed e-learning. This motivation to start self-directed e-learning,along with learners’ perceived quality of instruction and their fit for online learning, predicted
their motivation to continue self-directed online learning. Hsu (2019) also reports that in an
online setting, individuals’ experience of agency, capability, and relatedness, resulting in selfdetermination, is associated with a higher perception of knowledge transfer and increased
achievement of course objectives.
Another prominent and relevant motivational theory is the achievement goal theory. Originally,
the theory proposed two types of motivational goals for learning, task and ego goals (Nicholls,
1984), as in goals that are met by completing tasks or supporting one’s ego, respectively. Overtime, these goals have been revised to be called mastery and performance goals, respectively(Dweck, 1986). The first aimed at mastering tasks, and the second at performing better thanothers (Pintrich, 2000b). Some propose that mastery goals are more socially desirable bystudents because of their ability to please parents and teachers (Darnon et al., 1997).
Contemporary conceptualizations have introduced a multiple goal perspective to the theory
which combines both mastery and performance goals (Elliot, 1999; Harackiewicz et al., 2002;
Pintrich, 2000a). A relevant approach for this study is the idea that students shift theirmotivation between the two types of goals as and when it is relevant in their learning: they
focus on mastery goals while they are learning new information and working by themselves,and motivate themselves by performance goals when taking tests (K. Barron & Harackiewicz,
2001; Pintrich, 2000b). In the case of PBL, a majority of learning time is spent in the former.
Finally, the third theory that supports motivation to learn in PBL settings is the role of interestin student learning and development (Renninger et al., 1992). According to Renninger et al.,students’ interests play an essential role in their engagement with learning experiences. This
interest can be personal or situational, or both. Personal interest influences a learner’s
engagement with the social and non-social environment, and situational interest refers to howinteresting the environment is by itself to encourage interactions with people and objects. A
related theory is that by Voss and Schauble (1992), who propose a model of learning in whichlearning takes place in both, within the individual, and in the environment that the individual
is in. They claim that individuals use two types of “equipment” to learn. The first is valuebased that informs individuals’ goals and interests, and the second is intellectual that informs
individuals’ knowledge and beliefs. As per their model, learning takes place within theinterplay of these two equipment.
For our study, we synthesize the factors from the above theories as relevant to PBL. These
include personal meaning and relevance, autonomy and agency, connections with others, andcompetence development.
Methodology
For this paper, we interviewed eleven high school teachers from four schools across three statesof the United States. All four schools had adopted a PBL approach to teaching prior to thepandemic and continued their PBL practices with the limitations of the pandemic and virtualteaching. See table 1 for the teacher pseudonyms along with their school contexts. The teachers
belong to a mix of suburban, urban, rural public, and public charter schools.

97Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Table 1: Teachers and school background
Pseudonym

SchoolChloe
Leah
Melissa

Urban Public Charter

Naomi
DeniseJacob

Urban Public Charter

Eric
Eli

Suburban Public

TiffanyDavid
Rebecca

Rural Public

All four of the above schools are part of a network of schools supported by an organizationcommitted to rethinking and changing high school education. As members of this organization,
the school leaders and teachers from the four schools are part of common communities ofpractice.
We interviewed the teachers between May 11th and June 15th, 2020, using a semi-structured
interview protocol developed to understand the teachers’ perspectives on teaching with a PBL
approach, their experiences working with instructional coaches, and their transition to social
distance teaching in the wake of the pandemic. For this paper, we limit our analyses to theanswers and narratives from the interviews in response to their experiences transitioning tosocial distance teaching triggered by the pandemic. All the teachers were teaching completely
remotely i.e., from home, at the time we interviewed them. We conducted deductive coding(Corbin & Strauss, 2012; Denzin & Lincoln, 2005; Miles & Huberman, 1994; Patton, 2014) of
the interviews based on the concepts of the conceptual framework, as explained in the previous
section. The line of inquiry or research question for this paper is:
How does PBL present itself as a candidate for social distance learning when
considering students’ motivation to learn in online learning experiences?
Ethical Considerations
This research study was determined exempt by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Committee on the Use of Humans as Experimental Subjects under the exemption criteria as
defined by Federal regulation 45 CFR46 under Category 2 – Educational Testing, Surveys,
Interviews or Observation. All participants provided informed consent to be interviewed forthe purposes of this research study and were compensated for their time spent on the interview.
Pseudonyms were used in reporting the data to protect the participants’ identities.

98Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Findings
Personal Meaning and RelevanceThe first lens in the conceptual framework is that of personal meaning and relevance. In PBL,
students work on projects and activities that they find personally interesting and relevant totheir lives. This is true of the students’ projects in class and still true once classes pivoted toremote in the spring of 2020. The teachers share how, during the pandemic, their students
continue to work on projects that the teachers find educationally meaningful, and the students
personally interesting. In the following quotes, teachers speak to how PBL as a pedagogy
provides opportunities for their students to find personal meaning and relevance in what they
are learning, and how this continues to be true in social distance learning.
In watching her students pursue projects that are personally meaningful Leah shares how thisis helping to shift her notions of what counts as school learning and growth.
I love doing PBL... how can we continue to reinvent what’s school … I havesome students who are sewing hats ... teaching themselves random
instruments … It’s helped expand my idea of how do we measure learningand growth.
PBL is allowing students to pursue their interests and expand Leah’s notion of learning.
Tiffany, a business teacher, uses PBL pedagogy to help her students connect their class work
to their own lives.
...I know that kids are kids, at the end of the day, they’re going to say, ""It’snot important to me."" But if I can show you the parts that are important, andyou can walk away with those life lessons, then I’ve done my job.
She recognizes that students often do not see how what they learn in school is essential. In her
instruction, she ensures that students take what will be relevant and vital to them as life lessons
from the project experiences.
When schools moved to remote learning, Chloe needed to reframe her PBL lessons so thatstudents could work on projects that were still of interest to them but were also feasible given
the constraints of remote learning, including a loss of supplies in her classroom. By having
students devise their own projects, and what will they need and what do they have available tothem already. Chloe reframed her PBL lessons to be relevant and feasible.
Autonomy and Agency
The second lens in the conceptual framework is that of student autonomy and agency. A PBL
approach can enable students to have autonomy over their work, as they can work at their own
pace and schedule in self-directed ways as long as they meet the project’s broader goals. Since
projects are often related to student interest and are created to be relevant to them, there is spacein the experience for students to practice agency and perceive control over the learning
experience and outcomes. In their experience of teaching socially distanced PBL, teachers
share how they have provided differentiated learning experiences for students in the way they
deliver content and mentor their students one on one. While some students who struggled in
the traditional classroom performed better and even took charge of how they learned, otherhigh performers struggled. The teachers attribute successful performance to fewer distractions

99

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

and certain students being able to better self-pace their learning. We will discuss the possible
factors for students struggling to learn in the next section on connections with others.
When the pandemic started, Denise moved to a more hands-off approach, an approach that
PBL enables, to provide students with high-level project goals and not day to day instruction.
The students had to self-pace their way through the project, a shift in trust and agency for her
students, as Denise stated really trusting kids to guide themselves. In giving more autonomy
and agency to her students, Denise found...something else that’s changed is students...have traditionallystruggled...doing a lot of work … [now they] have been the most on top of it
and the most creative.
Remote PBL allowed Denise to place more autonomy and agency in pacing her students’ work,
which gave space for some students who had traditionally been struggling to thrive.
Tiffany likes that she can provide differentiated instruction for her students by teaching PBL
online, which she calls a low floor, high ceiling approach. Seeing how another educator
includes both the essential questions for the lesson and a section of the virtual learning platform
called…enrichment. I love that, and that’s going to be a new thing for me because
you always have more information you want to share with the students, but
you don’t want to overwhelm them … It helped me reestablish what
differentiation was in a different way … it’s a low floor, no ceiling approach.
Even while providing added scaffolding Tiffany also noticed that not all her students areexperiencing social distance PBL learning the same. Some of her usual high-performing
students are struggling, and some that she was concerned about are doing well. Tiffany heard
from her students who were thriving that they...love this because I’m succeeding, and I’m getting good grades … There’s
nobody in the classroom cracking stupid jokes to distract me.
Tiffany gives the students space to have more autonomy and agency without the distractionsof the classroom.
In the same vein as Tiffany, Melissa is experimenting with individualized one-on-one
mentoring during the quarantine:
One-on-one actually helps. ... You’re the person doing the work, I’m theperson just giving feedback … And I think what I would love is to translatethat when we go back next year of the same way...
Teaching PBL virtually has allowed Melissa to provide more autonomy and agency to her
students through shifting her role from the holder of knowledge to guide and supporter oflearning – a role she wants to continue back in the classroom.

100Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Similar to Melissa’s students’, Jacob’s students demonstrated agency, advocating for theirclasswork to be less a to-do list and more project work related to the environment, which is theschool’s focus.
I had a couple kids that wrote me and said, "Well, I can’t do this. Every classis just ‘Give me a list of things to do,’ and it’s taking forever. I hate it. ...thisone student, she really was...challenging us on the mission of the school andsaid, "We’re this environmental school, and I’m just in front of a computer
all day long”.
Students spoke out for the learning they wanted to do and successfully changed the work that
was asked of them.
Connections with Others
The third lens from the conceptual framework is that of experiencing connections with others.
As we mention in the previous subsection, teachers share that some of their students struggle
with social distance learning. One of the factors attributable to this is the lack of connection
with their peers, mentors, school community, and the communities that their projects arefocused on. Teachers share that in addition to the rift of not being in the physical vicinity ofeach other, they are also observing an emotional separation as they cannot make themselves
available in their students’ lives as caring adults in the same way as being in person in theclassroom. Teachers believe that this lack of connection has adversely affected teamwork andcollaborative aspects of learning.
Denise spoke about how the rift in social distance learning is negatively impacting relationshipbuilding:...[our school] struggle with a lot of things, what we don’t struggle in isrelationship-building. Kids like coming to school...I feel like I’ve lost that joy.
Eli similarly noticed a rift that social distance teaching has created between him and his
students:
There’s a legit distance between you and the students, not only, obviously,
spatial. It feels like, emotionally, there is a distance there. It’s really hard.
He can see his students struggling to be at home without the supportive community of aclassroom.
Leah misses being able to see her students’ progress on their project over time, and being
available for just in time supports:
When I’m building things for in-class, a lot of that is just me being able to be
there. So, if a kid does have a question, I can just give them that sentencestem.
In teaching online, she is unable to provide these scaffolds as easily.
Similar to Leah, Tiffany shares how she was not able to dynamically engage with her students
resulting in students working by themselves on their projects: once in a while they had

101Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

questions, but for the most part, they did things on their own... , often not doing the complete
background reading and work.
Rebecca too misses meeting with and interacting with her students one-on-one. She thinks thatonline communication can come across as cold:... I feel like everything online seems a lot colder and a lot... more harsh when
you’re just typing an answer to a question.
Similarly, Melissa craves the energy and passion that in-person engagements with her students
generated, It’s really difficult to maintain enthusiasm and passion for projects when you’re by
yourself. She also thinks that her students are not getting the social connections they need to
do work as they are used to.
Several teachers spoke about the loss of collaborative team projects in the move to remotelearning. Eli highlighted how working together in groups is absent from the online experience.
That’s definitely missing. The small group works, having a dedicated spacewithin those groups to be able to discuss and plan and map things out, andto even build their artifacts or their projects, that’s so hard to transition to,especially, in distance learning.
Naomi echoes Eli in the loss of social interactions and, in particular, the collaborative teamprojects of PBL, I think that teaming aspect was kind of lost at this time and that is aninvaluable thing that we do at (school name) is a lot of teamwork. In the spring of 2020,
collaborative projects, an integral part of many PBL assignments, were missing.
Along with a loss of collaborative learning in the move to virtual learning, students were lessable to engage with the school community. Chloe longs for celebrating her students’ growth asa classroom and school community. Similarly, Eric believes that an essential aspect of PBL
and their school is the community that students build and feel in the school, and social distancelearning omits this part of teaching and learning. In particular, Eric states:’,... a big part of project-based learning is not just the projects, but also thesense of social growth that happens during the project.
In virtual learning, teachers and students had a more challenging time connecting with others
to create a sense of community.
Competence Development
For the fourth lens of the conceptual framework, we look at what competencies the students
are developing, and those that their teachers want them to develop while learning from home
via PBL. We asked the teachers about the kind of skills they hoped their students were learning
at home by themselves. The teachers shared skills and lessons that can be masteredindividually, as many school districts changed their grading system due to the pandemic (Reichet al., 2020). The teachers’ answers ranged from learning how to be self-directed learners andmanaging their time efficiently, knowing what is valuable to them and self-advocating, andrelevant skills for life like essential math and professional email communications.

102Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Naomi shared that she hopes for her students to have learned and practiced leading their own
learning and planning out their work accordingly.
One of the competencies we’ve been focused on [is] lead ones [own]learning. … The kids were tracking their work every week and planning theirweek out.
Denise aspires for her students to learn time management and knowing when they are mosteffective.
I think time management has been really interesting, and also kids kind of
gauging when they’re most efficient... The kids that I knew struggled in schoolthat haven’t struggled, I think it’s because a lot of them were able to workwhen the time is effective for them.
Denise believes that students being self-aware of when and how they are most effective is apossible reason for some of her students to thrive with social distance learning. Similarly,
Tiffany wishes for her students to learn to take initiative of their learning, which she believes
is essential to becoming lifelong learners.
I hope that they see that there’s always a way to learn so that they cancontinue to be the lifelong learners that we’re trying to convince them thatthey should be. I do a lot of reminding them that as adults, the way we learn
is that we have to take the initiative.
By encouraging students to take more ownership of their own learning Tiffany believes her
students are more likely to become lifelong learners.
Melissa aspires for her students to feel empowered to know when it is okay not to do an
assignment and, in turn, where they should be focusing their learning efforts.
I want them to learn that you should not do things you don’t want to do.
Because over and over again, they would come to me and be like … “I guess
I’m supposed to do it [an essay]. But also, my grade is really good in his classand I kind of don’t care. And I’m stressed, and I’m working on this otherthing." And I would just be like, "… Don’t do things that don’t matter to you."
Similarly, Jacob hopes that the final projects that his students completed to answer the larger
school-wide questions felt real and valuable to his students.
I hope that with all the different phases of the year from actually being inseats to doing the distance learning that they were able to see a thread thatwas consistent throughout in terms of being aligned with the mission, alignedwith the big questions we’re trying to ask about the community ... and that thefact that we were trying to approach schooling differently. At the end, they
were producing things that felt real. When I think about the podcast and thebook, I love those projects so much, because at the end of the day, it produced
this really tangible...product that exists in the world ... So, I really hope thatthat is something that they experience and trusted...

103

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Eric taught his students the relevant math concepts of logarithmic growth.
So definitely due to the nature of the pandemic, I wanted to prioritize theexponential and logarithmic growth because I want them to understand how
quickly viruses branch out and how you can model and track their growth.
How are the people that are making the predictions... how are they doing
that?
Eric wants his students to gain specific skills in order to understand the science behind the
pandemic’s exponential growth.
Eli wanted to use this as an opportunity for his students to develop a healthy and productive
relationship with technology and learn professional communication etiquettes via email.
Email etiquette, I hope, how to not be afraid of technology, sometimes. I thinkthat’s one. It’s not because the program is difficult to use. It’s because of theirattitudes towards technology, sometimes. Same with Microsoft Word,
everything is in size 14 Comic Sans MS.
Through the move to social distance PBL during the spring of 2020, teachers emphasized
professional skills, life skills, and lifelong learning goals for their students.
Discussion
In the previous section, we presented how the teachers in PBL focused schools are social
distance teaching in the COVID-19 pandemic from the four lenses of our conceptual
framework, namely, personal interest and relevance, autonomy and agency, connection withothers, and competence development. In this section, informed by the findings and ourconceptual framework, we discuss key takeaways and ideas to consider when teaching PBL in
online settings. For successful online project-based teaching and learning, activities andprojects should be relevant to students and develop skills that can be mastered by students
individually. Students should be encouraged to take control and ownership of their learning,
and activities should provide for peer to peer and peer to mentor interactions even in online
settings. Finally, technology should serve as a means to support effective teaching and learning.
In these key takeaways, we provide examples of the teachers from our study enacting
motivational theories that informed the conceptual framework. These takeaways, at a highlevel, apply to most approaches of effective teaching and learning from a motivational
perspective. However, below we discuss instances of teachers adopting exemplar strategies
while teaching PBL online during a pandemic. We share these to provide examples andinspiration for teachers facing similar predicaments, and also to capture and archive howteachers rose to the challenge of keeping their students motivated to learn in disrupted times.
Make Space for Individualized Learning Experiences
Similar to in-person PBL approaches (Diehl et al., 1999; Hira & Hynes, 2017; Moursund, 1999;
Thomas, 2000), learning activities in online PBL settings should cater to students’ interests andbe relevant to their current and future lives. For example, Chloe encourages her students towork on project areas that are of interest to them; Leah’s students have been working on
activities like hat weaving and playing musical instruments which, they bring to share withclassmates and her; and Tiffany encourages her students to see how the start-ups they work onin their business class are relevant to their lives. It is also essential for the skills and learning

104Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

outcomes to be adjusted to ones that can be developed by students working the majority of thetime by themselves. For example, managing their own time and learning like Naomi, Denise,
and Tiffany’s students, learning what is valuable to them and advocating for what they need intheir school learning experiences like Melissa and Jacob’s students, and relevant skills likeessential math and professional communication like Eric and Eli’s students.
Encourage Students Taking Ownership of Learning
Inherently, PBL allows for greater student autonomy and agency than traditional lecture andhomework models of education (Bell, 2010; Blumenfeld et al., 1991). Online PBL instruction
should be accompanied by encouraging students to practice autonomy over how they spend
their time completing the project’s goals. Students should also be encouraged to advocate forthe kinds of projects they would like to work on and their involvement. Perceiving control overtheir work and schedule can prove useful in making students take ownership of their learning.
For example, Denise’s students are self-pacing themselves; Tiffany’s students are doing aminimum amount of common work and then being able to pick how much deeper they would
like to go into the content area; Melissa’s students are leading their learning and checking inwith her as a mentor; and Jacob’s students are advocating for doing more work related to theenvironment.
Enable Connections Between Peers and Mentors
An essential aspect to consider when teaching via PBL online is if systems are in place toencourage and support students to form connections with their peers and teachers. Feelingconnected with others is an important motivational factor for student learning (Ryan & Deci,
2000). Many of the study participants reported missing human connections, this virtual aspectof learning and motivation, in their current online PBL teaching experiences. Students need toconnect to be on teams together, collaborate on projects, and feel part of the school community.
They also need to communicate with their teachers as mentors and be connected with caring
adults as they make their way through school. This need for connection and teachers’ role aspart of the landscape of caring adults in students’ lives has been harder to achieve online(Anderson & Hira, 2020). We see this with these teachers as well, Eli and Denise share how
they miss the emotional and dynamic parts of their relationships with their students. Leah,
Tiffany, and Rebecca are unable to connect with their students one-on-one throughout theirprojects, and Eric and Chloe miss facilitating a supportive community for their students to learn
and develop in. Teachers believe this is a loss not just of connection but a fundamental loss to
how learning should take place through relationships.
Use technology to Support Learning
Technology cannot wholly replace the school learning experience. However, it certainly makes
teaching and learning a possibility when there are constraints on in-person learning like during
the COVID-19 pandemic (Code et al., 2020; Peterson et al., 2020). Since technology mediates
the environments in which students learn, it is imperative to consider how teachers and students
engage with the environment to experience learning. Technology can also help support thethree prior takeaways in this section. It is perhaps useful to think of technology as a means to
support teaching and learning, and not entirely replace it (Dowding, 2004). In addition to
introducing relevant educational technologies, schools need to provide training on using
technology and set up systems to communicate and ensure a common understanding of how
and when to use different technological tools.

105Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Limitations
In this paper, we inquired how PBL presents itself as a candidate for online social distancelearning in the COVID-19 pandemic. One of the limitations of this work is that it captures
teachers’ experiences in a moment of time, which is the spring 2020 semester in the UnitedStates, soon after the transition to online learning. There is still more to learn and inquire about
the teachers’ and students’ experiences of PBL and online learning during the pandemic overthe course of the school year. This study, though in part communicates teacher and student
interactions, it does not cover the students’ perspective of learning during the pandemic.
Conclusion
This study initiates a conversation about teaching PBL in online settings and exploring
motivation with PBL teaching. Future work would include following teachers and students
during the academic year 2020-2021 as school districts adopt online, hybrid, and in person
learning, to learn how PBL may continue to motivate students to learn. With a particular focus
on technology’s role in mediating such learning experiences and understanding teachers’
motivation to teach PBL in these unusual times.

106

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

References
Anderson, E., & Hira, A. (2020). Loss of brick-and-mortar schooling: how elementary
educators respond. Information and Learning Science, 121(5–6), 401–408.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-04-2020-0085
Barnum, M., & Bryan, C. (2020). America’s great remote-learning experiment: What surveys
of teachers and parents tell us about how it went. Chalkbeat.
Barron, B. J. S., Schwartz, D. L., Vye, N. J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., Zech, L., & Bransford,
J. D. (1998). Doing with understanding: Lessons From research on problem-andproject-based learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3–4), 271–311.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.1998.9672056
Barron, K., & Harackiewicz, J. (2001). Achievement goals and optimal motivation: Testing
multiple goal models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(5), 706–722.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.80.5.706
Baş, G. (2011). Investigating the effects of project-based learning on students’ academic
achievement and attitudes towards English lesson. The Online Journal of New
Horizons in Education, 1(4).
Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The Clearing
House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(2), 39–43.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650903505415
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A.
(1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting thelearning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3–4), 369–398.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1991.9653139
Brophy, J. (2005). Goal theorists should move on from performance goals. Educational
Psychologist, 40(3), 167–176. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4003_3
Çakiroğlu, Ü., & Erdemir, T. (2019). Online project based learning via cloud computing:
exploring roles of instructor and students. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(4),
547–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1489855
Chen, C., & Yang, Y. (2019). Revisiting the effects of project-based learning on students’
academic achievement: A meta-analysis investigating moderators. Educational
Research Review, 26, 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2018.11.001
Chen, K., & Jang, S. (2010). Motivation in online learning: Testing a model of selfdetermination theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 741–752.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.01.011
Child Trends. (2018). Home computer access and internet use.
https://www.childtrends.org/indicators/home-computer-access.
Ching, Y. H., & Hsu, Y. C. (2013). Peer feedback to facilitate project-based learning in an
online environment. International Review of Research in Open and Distance
Learning, 14(5), 259–276. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i5.1524
Code, J., Ralph, R., & Forde, K. (2020). Pandemic designs for the future: perspectives oftechnology education teachers during COVID-19. Information and Learning Science,
121(5/6), 419–431. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-04-2020-0112

107

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2012). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and proceduresfor developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230153
Darnon, C., Dompnier, B., Delmas, F., Pulfrey, C., & Butera, F. (1997). Achievement goalpromotion at university: Social desirability and social utility of mastery andperformance goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(1), 119–134.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012824
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior.
Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). The Sage handbook of qualitative research (4th ed.).
Sage Publications.
Diehl, W., Grobe, T., Lopez, H., & Cabral, C. (1999). Project-based learning: A strategy forteaching and learning. Center for Youth Development and Education, Corporation for
Business, Work, and Learning.
Dowding, M. R. (2004). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide.
Canadian Journal of Communication, 29(1).
https://doi.org/10.22230/cjc.2004v29n1a1415
Dweck, C. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41(10),1040–1048. https:// https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.10.
Echelon Insights. (2020). National Parents Union - Coronavirus impact survey.
https://nationalparentsunion.org
Educators for Excellence. (2020). Voices from the virtual classroom: A survey of America’s
teachers on COVID-19-related education issues. https://e4e.org/voices-virtualclassroom
Elliot, A. J. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational
Psychologist, 34(3), 169–189. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3403_3
Emmanuel, N. (2018). Education technology is a global opportunity | TechCrunch. Tech
Crunch. https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/19/education-technology-is-a-globalopportunity/
Gewertz, C. (2020). Data: Students are getting less instruction time during coronavirus.
EdWeek Research Canter.
Hamilton, L. S., Kaufman, J. H., & Diliberti, M. (2020). Teaching and leading through apandemic: Key findings from the American educator panels Spring 2020 COVID-19
surveys. RAND Corporation. https://doi.org/10.7249/RRA168-2
Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Pintrich, P. R., Elliott, A. J., & Thrash, T. M. (2002).
Revision of achievement goal theory: Necessary and illuminating. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 94, 638–645. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.638
Hartnett, M. (2016). Motivation in Online Education. Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0700-2_2
Hira, A., & Hynes, M. M. (2017). Design-based research to broaden participation in precollege engineering: research and practice of an interest-based engineering challenges
framework. European Journal of Engineering Education, 44(1–2), 103–122.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2017.1405243

108

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Hsu, H. C. K., Wang, C. V., & Levesque-Bristol, C. (2019). Reexamining the impact of selfdetermination theory on learning outcomes in the online learning environment.
Education and Information Technologies, 24(3), 2159–2174.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09863-w
Kim, K.-J., & Frick, T. W. (2011). Changes in student motivation during online learning.
Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(1), 1–23.
https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.44.1.a
Kokotsaki, D., Menzies, V., & Wiggins, A. (2016). Project-based learning: A review ofliterature. Improving Schools, 19(3), 267–277.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480216659733
Kraft, M., & Simon, N. (2020). Teachers’ experiences working from home during the
COVID-19 pandemic. Upbeat.
Meticulous Research. (2020). Learning management system market is expected to grow at a
CAGR of 20.5% to reach $28.1 billion by 2025.
https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2020/02/05/1980255/0/en/LearningManagement-System-Market-is-Expected-to-Grow-at-a-CAGR-of-20-5-to-Reach-281-Billion-by-2025-Meticulous-Research.html
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Sage Publications.
Moursund, D. (1999). Project-based learning using information technology. International
Society for Technology in Education.
Nicholls, J. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience,task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91(3), 328–346.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.91.3.328
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books, Inc.
Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Constructionism. Ablex Publishing.
Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. SAGE Publications.
Peterson, L., Scharber, C., Thuesen, A., & Baskin, K. (2020). A rapid response to COVID19: one district’s pivot from technology integration to distance learning. Informationand Learning Science, 121(5/6), 461–469. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-04-2020-0131
Piaget, J. (1970). Genetic epistemology. Norton.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000a). Multiple goals, multiple pathways: The role of goal orientation inlearning and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 544–555.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.3.544
Pintrich, P. R. (2000b). An achievement goal theory perspective on issues in motivation
terminology, theory, and research. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 92–104. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1017
Reich, J., Buttimer, C. J., Fang, A., Hillaire, G., Hirsch, K., Larke, L., Littenberg-Tobias, J.,
Moussapour, R. M., Napier, A., Thompson, M., & Slama, R. (2020). Remote learning
guidance from state education agencies during the COVID-19 pandemic: A first look.
https://doi.org/10.35542/OSF.IO/437E2
Renninger, A., Hidi, S., & Krapp, A. (Eds.). (1992). The role of interest in learning anddevelopment. Psychology Press.

109

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–
78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
Savery, J., & Duffy, T. (2001). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its
constructivist framework. Technical report: Indiana University.
Senko, C., Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2011). Achievement goal theory at thecrossroads: Old controversies, current challenges, and new directions. Educational
Psychologist, 46(1), 26–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.538646
Sutia, C., Wulan, A. R., & Solihat, R. (2019). Students’ response to project learning with
online guidance through google classroom on biology projects. Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, 1157(2). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/2/022084
Svihla, V., & Reeve, R. (2016). Facilitating problem framing in project-based learning.
Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 10(2).
https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1603
Thomas, J. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. Autodesk Foundation
PBL.
Voss, J., & Schauble, L. (1992). Individual interest and learning in school. In A. Renninger,
S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.), The role of interest in learning and development.
Psychology Press.
Wan, T. (2019). US Edtech investments peak again with $1.45 billion raised in 2018.
EdSurge News. https://www.edsurge.com/news/2019-01-15-us-edtech-investmentspeak-again-with-1-45-billion-raised-in-2018
Yilmaz, R., Karaoglan Yilmaz, F. G., & Keser, H. (2020). Vertical versus shared e-leadershipapproach in online project-based learning: a comparison of self-regulated learning
skills, motivation and group collaboration processes. Journal of Computing in Higher
Education, 32, 628–654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-020-09250-2
Corresponding author: Avneet Hira
Email: avneet.hira@bc.edu

110Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Distance Teaching Practicum: Its Impact on Pre-Service EFL Teachers’
Preparedness for Teaching
Gülten Koşar
Hatay Mustafa Kemal University
Turkey111

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Abstract
Teaching practicum performs a crucial role in initial English language teacher preparation
programs in that it offers pre-service English-as-a-foreign-language teachers a great chance to
put the pedagogical content knowledge they have acquired through the coursework into
practice by teaching real students. Due to the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic, pre-service
English-as-a-foreign-language teachers in the context of the present study, had to do more thanhalf of their teaching practicums via distance education. This qualitative case study explores
25 pre-service English-as-a-foreign-language teachers’ conceptions of the influence of distanceteaching practicum on their preparedness for the first year of teaching. The data collected byemailed questionnaires were analysed adopting inductive content analysis. The results
indicated they did not believe distance teaching practicum was effective in enhancing theirprofessional learning and preparing them for the first year of teaching. In addition, they did notthink teaching practicum conducted face-to-face could be replaced by distance teachingpracticum.
Keywords: COVID-19 pandemic, distance teaching practicum, preparedness for teaching,pre-service English-as-a-foreign-language teachers, teaching practicum112

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Teaching practicum (TP) could be conceived to be a platform where pre-service English-as-aforeign-language teachers (PSEFLTs) gain a first-hand experience of testing the effectivenessof disparate methods for English language teaching, about which theoretical information isprovided by the university component of pre-service teacher education. Notwithstanding theimportance of the theoretical knowledge imparted to pre-service teachers to help them prepare
for the teaching profession, the mismatches that may occur between what is preached in thecoursework and what is lived in the field might be the source of not only PSEFLTs’, but also
beginning EFL teachers’ questioning its merit. Since learning to teach is viewed to be a contextdependent activity (Zeichner, 2010), the field is deemed to be of high significance by PSEFLTs
to experience what it means to be a teacher and to gain profound insights into teaching andlearning from the viewpoints of teachers rather than students, which they have been doing to
the date they commence to do their TPs.
Distance education (DE) that could be defined as the education provided via online learning
environments and on which a plethora of research has been undertaken (Akimov & Malin,2020; Bose, 2013; Lee, 2017; Nielsen, 1997; Ramos et al., 2011; Raygan & Moradkhani, 2020)
differs from face-to-face education presented in a learning setting with the physical presenceof the teacher and students. Not only does the mode of delivery change from face-to-faceeducation to DE, but also the learning outcomes produced by them may change. Such a
discussion on the disparities between the effects of face-to-face education and distanceeducation on student learning can be extended to the probable discrepancies between the effectsof face-to-face TP and distance teaching practicum (DTP) on PSEFLTs’ professional learningand preparedness for the teaching profession.
Until the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, TP had been conducted by placing senior
PSEFLTs into practicum schools where they were required to teach students and observe their
mentor teachers’ instructional practices. As a result of the pandemic, they could not complete
their TPs in their placement schools. In view of the fact that PSEFLTs hold TP in high esteem
and view it as an invaluable arena adding to their preparedness for teaching, this research aimed
to unpack PSEFLTs’ conceptions of the effect of DTP on their preparedness for the first yearof the teaching profession. The lack of research into the impact of DTP on PSEFLTs’
preparedness for teaching indicates the contribution to be made by this study to the literature.
Additionally, the findings to be presented in this research could prompt teacher educators,
mentor teachers and policy makers in TP to deeply ponder over what initiatives to launch witha view to running effective DTP so that PSEFLTs can make the most of it.
Literature Review
Pre-Service Teachers’ Professional Learning
Teacher professional learning could be defined as learning practices they go into in an attempt
to enhance the quality of their teaching. What teachers want to learn professionally couldchange according to their year of teaching experience (Louws et al., 2017), and thedevelopment of pedagogical content knowledge is believed to be person- and context-bound(Driel & Berry, 2012). Associated with that, the factors contributing to pre-service teachers’
professional learning are postulated to be manifold, and in addition, they are considered to be
influenced by past and present experiences having been gained in various contexts (Leeferink
et al., 2015). Considering “the person” as one of the main determiners in gaining pedagogicalcontent knowledge, it could be alleged the experiences pre-service teachers had in their prioreducational lives and the ones they undergo as fulfilling the requirements of the pre-service
teacher education program presumptively have something to do with their professional

113

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

learning. Pre-service teachers assume an active role in the construction of their professional
knowledge during their initial teacher education (Tang et al., 2012), and what they acquire
through campus- and school-based learning could foster their abilities to work at schools (Tanget al., 2016). Pre-service teachers seek help for their professional learning starting from theirfirst year in the program (Toom et al., 2017), which brings forward the crucial function to beserved by teacher educators and the other parties featuring in pre-service teacher education.
A set of actions can be taken to promote pre-service teachers’ professional learning. For
instance, it could be stimulated through peer assisted learning as was reported in the research
conducted by Bone et al. (2019). Teaching abroad experience is also posited to broaden preservice teachers’ knowledge of teaching in a world continually increasing in complexity(Moorhouse & Harfitt, 2019). Additionally, Anwaruddin’s (2016) study yielded integration of
information and communication technologies into English language teachers’ professional
development activities ended in improvement in their pedagogical knowledge. Seeing theincreased integration of technology into teaching and learning practices at all levels of
education over the last two decades, avoiding it in pre-service teacher education would literally
be swimming against the current.
Notwithstanding the fact that subject knowledge is appreciated to be effective in quality
teaching (Richards et al., 2013), teaching experience gained by virtue of TP is on a par withpre-service teachers’ knowledge of English language teaching. TP occupies, in effect, a vital
place in pre-service teacher education (Gray et al., 2019; Grudnoff, 2011; Ulvik & Smith, 2011)as pre-service teachers practice teaching real students and develop their teaching competencies
via employing pedagogical content knowledge they have accumulated from the start of and/or
during their TPs (Choy et al., 2014; Cohen et al., 2013; Gebhard, 2009). The indispensable
contribution of teaching experience gained in TP to PSEFLTs’ learning was demonstrated in
Chien’s (2015) study from the points of view of PSEFLTs. As well as practicing teaching in
TP, reflecting on teaching practices impacts on pre-service teachers’ professional learning. For
instance, in the study by Gan and Lee (2016), it was reported that pre-service English-as-asecond-language teachers’ reflections on their teaching experiences in TP resulted inprofessional learning with regard to effective classroom practices. Undoubtedly, mentor
teachers perform a fundamental role in how much pre-service teachers learn from theirexperiences of TP. Accordingly, the substantial role played by mentor teachers in pre-service
teachers’ learning to teach is accentuated in the literature (Adams, 2017; Barak & Wang, 2020).
Irrespective of the fact each student teacher has diverse needs in the transition period between
the final year of pre-service teacher education programs and the first year of teaching (Dahlgren& Chiriac, 2009), they all need practice teaching and reflect on their teaching practices in
conjunction with the feedback they receive from their mentor teachers and university
supervisors.
Distance Teacher Education
Distance teacher education could be conducted as a supplement to face-to-face teacher
education or as a substitute for it as a consequence of the emergence of an unanticipatedcircumstance like a pandemic. Distance teacher education is contended to be an agent
promoting the increase in the exchange of ideas between lecturers and pre-service foreign
language teachers and developing students’ skills of the use of technology for their learning(Forbes & Khoo, 2015), and it is viewed to be an agent enhancing pre-service teachers’
professional learning and development (Turvey, 2012). Moreover, online technologies are
considered to facilitate personalized teacher professional development in Yurkofsky et al.’s(2019) study. It was demonstrated in the study that DE promoted pre-service teachers’

114

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

reflective practice, and offered curricular and emotional support to them. The advantages ofDE, according to Cowan (1995), were the freedom students had in placing more emphasis on
the topic they wanted to learn and in the decisions they made in the learning process, and having
the chance to study at their own pace. However, the author claimed that it embodied a numberof disadvantages including the absence of effective communication, considering the one inface-to-face communication, the difficulty to be faced by students in taking equal advantage ofthe same DE, and lack of socialization among students and teachers.
The way DE is conducted affects the satisfaction pre-service teachers derive from it. To
exemplify, the research by Kim et al. (2011) revealed the quality of teaching positively
influenced learning satisfaction with DE. The study by Offir et al. (2008) explored thedifferences in the learning outcomes produced by synchronous and asynchronous distancelearning systems. Synchronous distance learning was depicted to be more effective thanasynchronous, originating from the higher level of interaction between the teacher and students.
The extant studies on DE also reported negative conceptions student teachers held about it due
to the problems in regard to the inability to use technology, the need for training the staff todevelop their technological skills, demotivation among students, and being devoid of social
presence (Gillies, 2008). The research done by Adem (2009) yielded the reasons behind thehigh attrition rates amongst the participants of distance teacher education programs, which
involved the insufficiency of the support and overburdening the participating teachers by thework required. What is reported in Adem’s (2009) study indicates the necessity of offering firmand continuing support to distance pre-service teachers. The level of support to be provided tothem largely depends upon their particular needs. To illustrate, the significance of virtual field
experience for pre-service teachers who could not go to schools was emphasized besides theneed for the development of their technological skills in Phillion et al.’s (2003) study.
Initiating and sustaining a strong interaction with pre-service teachers in distance education
can be deemed to be a predictor of the effectiveness of DE. Therefore, the quality of DE could
be improved through increasing both the quantity and quality of the interaction between
students and teachers (Carrillo & Flores, 2020). Meaningful tasks as a part of online courses
were favoured while the ones mandating memorization and group activities were not founduseful by the study participants in the research by Boling et al. (2011). Even though designingmeaningful tasks and maintaining interaction between the teacher educator and pre-service
teachers and amidst pre-service teachers seem to be challenging in distance teacher education,
Falloon’s (2011) study suggested the promoting effect of virtual classrooms on the occurrenceof quality dialogue. Furthermore, an array of improvements in DE such as providing prompt
feedback and constant adaptation of the online system based on students’ comments are
required to foster student learning (Hall, 1996). In addition to pre-service teachers, university
supervisors and mentor teachers could derive benefits from distance teacher education(Gruenhagen et al., 1999). They may have the chance to develop their skills in effectively andefficiently using digital technologies in pre-service teacher education and their repertoire oftactics to employ at challenging times in distance teacher education.
The literature encompasses studies demonstrating no significant difference in students’contentment receiving education in traditional classrooms and online classrooms (Skylar et al.,2005). Higher education students’ social presence in online learning environments is contended
to be affected positively by a comfortable online learning environment in which their feedbackon the process of their distance learning is valued (Sung & Mayer, 2012). The pivotal role
played by feedback in getting the most out of DE on the part of pre-service teachers wasstressed in Uribe and Vaughan’s (2017) study. Pre-service teachers instructed on the115

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

significance of providing timely feedback in encouraging student learning need to receive
immediate feedback from their teacher educators. The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic
has urged all the parties involved in pre-service teacher education to ground pre-service teacher
learning on digital technologies, about which they are likely to hold distinct views. For
instance, the teacher educators participating in a recent study conducted by Moyo (2020)
expounded divergent views on how teacher certification would be finalized in the absence of
TP done in the field. In addition, they emphasized the significance of appreciating favourable
outcomes of TP conducted face-to-face in a real classroom environment to sustain the achieved
standards in pre-service teacher education.
Andragogy, developed by Knowles (1968), is the theory underpinning this study. The theoryof andragogy lays the emphasis on adult learners’ characteristics to explicate how they learn.
Following is Table 1 displaying adult learner characteristics proposed by Knowles (1980,1984).
Table 1: Adult learner characteristics
As a person matures, his or her self-concept moves from that of a dependent personality
toward one of a self-directing human being (Knowles, 1980, p. 43).
An adult accumulates a growing reservoir of experience, which is a rich resource for learning(Knowles, 1980, p. 43).
The readiness of an adult to learn is closely related to the developmental tasks of his or hersocial role (Knowles, 1980, p. 43).
There is a change in time perspective as people mature –from future application ofknowledge to immediacy of application. Thus, an adult is more problem-centred thansubject-centred in learning (Knowles, 1980, p. 43).
The most potent motivations are internal rather than external (Knowles, 1984, p. 12).
Adults need to know why they need to learn something (Knowles, 1984, p. 12).
Since the participants in this study are adult learners, according to andragogy, they aresupposed to be self-directed and internally motivated learners, which could have its reflectionsin their perceptions with respect to DTP. Review of related literature has uncovered that DTP
is an under-researched topic necessitating more research to enlighten its impact on PSEFLTs’
professional learning and their preparedness for beginning to teach following graduation; thus,
this research targets unravelling what views PSEFLTs hold about the effect of the DTP they
have completed on their preparedness for the first year of the teaching profession.
Methodology
Research Design and the Context
This study was designed as a qualitative case study because, according to Strauss and Corbin(1998), qualitative research is “research about persons’ lives, lived experiences, behaviours,
emotions, and feelings” (p. 11), and this research aims at exploring PSEFLTs’ lived DTP
experiences. Additionally, as is stated by Denzin and Lincoln (2010), gaining a deeper accountof a subject’s perceptions of a phenomenon necessitates the use of qualitative study, and in thisresearch, delving into PSEFLTs’ DTP experiences was targeted. Furthermore, as is suggested
by Punch (1998), the question of what kind of research, qualitative or quantitative, could enable
us to learn more about what is investigated was posed prior to the start of this research. Taking
into account the research question to which answers were sought in the present study, theanswer to that question was found to be qualitative research. In addition to these, this research

116Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

does not intend to generalize the findings to other contexts, but to explore the study
participants’ perceptions of the DTP they have done.
In the context of this study, senior PSEFLTs have to take a 14-week TP course in the last yearof initial English language teacher education programs. The course aims to endorse PSEFLTs
preparing for the teaching profession by providing an opportunity to them for transferring thepedagogical content knowledge they have gained since the beginning of their academic
education into their teaching in their practicum schools. PSEFLTs must teach at least 14 hours
in their placement schools, assigned by Provincial Directorate of National Education. However,the PSEFLTs in this study could not complete their TPs in their placement schools on accountof the coronavirus disease. They had been to their placement schools for just three weeks when
their country started to be shaken by the deleterious effects of COVID-19 on every aspect oflife. For this reason, they could not continue going to their placement schools in the remaining
11 weeks; instead, they were assigned the following tasks:••••

Read the regulations regarding the teaching profession and add a copy of them to your
file.
Read the rules to be obeyed at schools and add a copy of them to your file.
Provide information about the online systems having already been used by thepracticing teachers to do school-related work and the distance education system
introduced synchronously with the termination of the face-to-face education.
Analyse the 2019-2023 strategic plan of the Ministry of National Education and add asynopsis of it to your file.

The participants completed the tasks and submitted their assignments to their university
supervisors by uploading them to the distance education system used by the university they
were enrolled in. The university supervisors were asked to email the assignments of the
PSEFLTs they had supervised to their mentor teachers. The performance of the PSEFLTs on
the TP course was assessed through grading their assignments, which had been done byassessing the lessons taught by them before the emergence of COVID-19. Subsequent to thecompletion of the DTP, a mailed questionnaire was administered to find answers to the researchquestion.
Participants
The questionnaire was e-mailed to 42 fourth-year PSEFLTs, the selection of whom was
grounded on convenience sampling. Nonetheless, 25 PSEFLTs responded to it. The mean ageof the participants was 23.2. Fifteen participants were female and the rest were male. All theparticipants had to complete their TP at a distance and were the first PSEFLTs doing DTP. The
participants were informed about the purpose of the study and their consent was obtained; in
addition, it was notified that they could withdraw from the study at any time for any reason.
The name of the participants will not be mentioned throughout this research to protect theirprivacy. Each participant is numbered and when extracting statements from their responses,
expressions like PSEFLT 2, PSEFLT 5 are used.
Data Collection Tool and Analysis
A mailed questionnaire comprising two parts was developed by the researcher. The first partwas used to disclose demographic information about the participants while the second part
involved the three open-ended questions posed to uncover PSEFLTs’ perceptions of the DTP.
The questions were created after reading the literature on DE, and then were sent to three117

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

English language teacher educators to ensure the precision of the questions and that they could
offer answers to the research question. The questions in the questionnaire are:•••

What are your opinions on the effect of the paperwork assigned to you in place ofpracticing teaching in real classes on your professional learning?
Taking into account not having the opportunity for completing your TP in the field,
how do you feel about your preparedness for teaching in your first year on the job?
How do you think DTP could be offered in a way different from assigning paperwork
so that it could help you prepare for your professional life better?

The data gathered from the questions were analysed inductively following the steps suggested
by Creswell (2007). The data were read by two coders, one of whom is the researcher, before
they began the coding process, thereby getting a rough idea of the participants’ views about the
DTP. The coders selected one of the questionnaires and thought about what was meant in the
responses by the respondent, and wrote it in two or three words. Afterwards, the coding process
started. Following that, each coder looked at his/her list of codes and tried to lessen the numberof the codes to 25-30 to avoid redundancy. Before commencing to develop themes from thecodes, the coders checked each other’s codes and tried to come to an agreement on thediscrepancies between the codes they had produced. Finally, themes were developed from thecodes. Peer debriefing (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) was conducted with an eye to ensuring
trustworthiness in this research. The processes undergone in this study, from the employedresearch design to the data collection tool and analysis, were checked by a pre-service English
language teacher educator. Moreover, member checking (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) was done bysharing the findings and their interpretations with the participants to ensure they reflected what
they had in their minds about the DTP.
Findings
The first and second questions in the mailed questionnaire served to obtain data on what theparticipants thought about the influence of the DTP on their preparedness for the first year of
the teaching profession. The data on the first question of what the PSEFLTs conceived of theeffectiveness of the assigned paperwork instead of practicing teaching in the field led to theemergence of the theme below.
Effective in Learning Professional Regulations, Useless in Learning to TeachAll the participants held the conception that the paperwork they completed helped them learn
about the regulations in relation to teaching profession, which, according to them, could belearned easily from the website of the Ministry of National Education even if they had not been
assigned it. The statement of PSEFLT 21 epitomizes others’ viewpoints on the effect of thepaperwork they carried out on their professional learning.
I believe that nothing can be compared to the real practice in a classroom
with real students. Because, as a teacher candidate, I think observing a realclassroom atmosphere and experiencing some teaching-related situations intheir own contexts can give me enough confidence to deal with similar
situations in my future teaching career.
The participants indicated professional learning was learning about teaching for them, which
could be achieved by teaching practice, and therefore, they believed their professional learning
could be enhanced by putting the content and pedagogical knowledge into practice in real

118

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

teaching. The PSEFLTs highly valued the TP constituent of pre-service teacher education,
which enabled them to work out the effectiveness of the teaching methods they had learned
and on which they had done their microteaching. PSEFLT 10 stated in her survey:
Teaching real students is beneficial for us because we really teach something
in classes. We need to practice teaching to develop our teaching skills, but
we couldn’t do it this term because of the COVID-19.
PSEFLT 2 explicated her perception of the negative impact of the paperwork on her
professional learning:
When I learned I had to submit a file on regulations instead of teaching, I
was really disappointed and demotivated because I know that the best way oflearning to teach is to teach.
The second question in the questionnaire presented invaluable insights into PSEFLTs’
preparedness for the first year of teaching profession. The content analysis revealed that aside
from one PSEFLT, all the others did not feel ready for the first of year of teaching as aconsequence of the DTP they had completed. The participant who claimed she was prepared
for the first year of teaching, despite the DTP, stated she had been tutoring for three years andthat that teaching experience made her feel that she was ready to start to teach. The content
analysis of the remaining 24 participants’ responses led to the development of the following
theme.
I Missed Irreplaceable Experiences, and Therefore, I Do Not Think I am Prepared toStart to Teach
The respondents pointing out that they were not prepared for the first year of teaching asserted
that they had been deprived of the valuable hands-on experience of teaching they would havegained if the pandemic had not hit the normal flow of the TP having been maintained for
decades. PSEFLT 15 explained why he was not prepared for the first year of teaching in thefollowing words:
I feel uncomfortable about not doing my practicum in my placement
school. I really don’t feel ready for teaching in any context. I guess I
did not learn how to teach.
PSEFLT 7 stated:
For the first year on the job, TP is needed. So, because I had to do DTP, I
am lacking in self-confidence in my teaching skills.
Linked with the significance attached to gaining experience of teaching, another point
conveyed in the responses is that the participants believed the more opportunity they had had
to teach English to real students, the more prepared they would have been for teaching English,
which had been hindered because of the pandemic.
I think, as pre-service teachers, we have to practise more and more because
we need to improve our teaching skills to teach better. Also, we need to bepresent at schools to get accustomed to the operation of schools. Because of
these, we had to go to practicum schools but we couldn’t (PSEFLT 14).

119

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

The third question was added to the questionnaire to learn about the PSEFLTs’ suggestions
concerning how DTP could be designed in a different way to better serve senior PSEFLTs in
preparing them for the first year of teaching. The content analysis revealed that they had norecommendation as to offering DTP in a different way to improve its effectiveness in equipping
PSEFLTs with the knowledge and competencies they would need to use in their professional
lives. The reasons they stated for suggesting nothing about improving DTP developed thetheme given below.
No DTP Could Replace Face-to-Face TP
The participants asserted in their responses that they had no idea about how to improve thequality of DTP as they did not believe that TP could be conducted through DE. From theirpoints of view, it should be done face-to-face; that is to say, they should be at schools teaching
students, observing how schools operate and what responsibilities other than teaching theteacher has. The PSEFLTs stated that TP was the course they had waited till the last term of
the program, yet they could not complete it by being physically present at their placement
schools. Three of the respondents argued that they should be subjected to face-to-face TP after
the end of the pandemic or at least as soon as it lost its detrimental effects before beginning toteach.
I have no suggestion about how DTP could be made more effective because
I do not think it can be effective at all. For TP, we should be at schools withreal students. DE is not appropriate for TP. It is not a course like linguistics;
because of that, I can develop my teaching only if I teach. Something should
be done to give us the chance to do our practicum face-to-face before we
start to work in the field (PSEFLT-11).
Discussion
The findings demonstrated that the TP the PSEFLTs had to complete via DE as a result of theoutbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic did not help them enhance their professional learning
aside from learning professional regulations. Due to the unprecedented impact exerted by the
pandemic on educational life involving tertiary education, the participants had to complete thepaperwork assigned to all the senior Education Faculty students in the context of the study,
which did not result in professional learning for the study participants, who defined it asbroadening pedagogical content knowledge and transferring it into practice. These findings are
the indicators of the significance of this study inasmuch as the related literature does not entail
a study reporting on PSEFLT’s viewpoints on the contribution of DTP to their professional
learning, and associated with that, to their preparedness for the first year of the teachingprofession. Integrating technologies into teacher education contributes substantially toteachers’ professional learning as was yielded in Anwaruddin’s (2016) research, nonetheless,most parts of the TP done through DE were not perceived to be adequate to extend theirprofessional learning. Such discontent with the DTP stemmed from what was expected of themto complete their TP, which pinpoints the importance of providing a chance for PSEFLTs topractice online teaching. By the same token, the PSEFLTs’ perceptions regarding the DTP they
completed indicate the necessity for determining the content of DTP contemplatively and incooperation with PSEFLTs. It was revealed in the findings that the content of the DTP
disappointed the PSEFLTs and demotivated them to complete the program. In view of theimportance of the high level of motivation novice teachers have in their success in the first yearof teaching, the study participants who will begin to teach in the following school year might
encounter motivation-related problems. Providing the respondents had had the chance to carry

120

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

on going to their placement schools and online learning tools had been incorporated into theprocess, their perceived unenhanced professional learning could have been empowered as was
suggested by Forbes and Khoo (2015).
The PSEFLTs stated they were not prepared for the first year of teaching due to not being able
to complete their TPs face-to-face in their placement schools. They delineated what they had
been devoid of as a result of the DTP by addressing the lack of teaching experience, theopportunity to observe the classroom practices of their mentor teachers and to observe theoperation of schools, among which losing the chance to practice teaching was the mostannoying for them. The findings show that TP is highly valued by the study participants, andsimilarly, the participants in the studies undertaken by Gan and Lee, 2016; Chen, 2015; Choyet al., 2014 and Cohen et al., 2013 gave special prominence to it. The stress placed on TP makes
sense because it is the arena where they display the teaching skills they have gained anddeveloped to a certain extent, and get feedback on them (Uribe & Vaughan, 2017). In the DTP
the participants conducted, there was no interaction between them and their mentor teachers,significant figures in initial teacher education (Adams, 2017; Barak & Wang, 2020), because
no circumstance occurred to get in touch with them, which can make the picture of what the
PSEFLTs lived clearer. Taking into account the need PSEFLTs appeal for starting from theirfirst year in the program (Toom et al., 2017), the pivotal role of the quality of the interaction
amongst the stakeholders of initial teacher education becomes evident.
In addition to the absence of the interaction between the PSEFLTs and their mentor teachers,
the one between PSEFLTs and their university supervisors was not gratifying as could beunderstood from the respondents’ responses, involving that they lacked self-confidence in theircurrent teaching abilities. This indicates TP done in real classrooms caters for the increase in
PSEFLTs’ level of self-confidence. In line with this, the participants could not offer any
suggestion to improve the effectiveness of DTP for they had a strong belief in the conceptionthat TP should be done by the physical presence of PSEFLTs in their placement schools.
Though the respondents did not come up with an alternative for TP conducted face-to-face,
Phillion et al. (2003) suggested virtual teaching practice for the pre-service teachers who could
not go to placement schools. Given the fact that the research participants and the other parties
in TP were unprepared for conducting it at a distance, it could be understood why the PSEFLTs
could not make recommendations for reforming the way it was conducted in their context.
However, the invaluable experience gained by the stakeholders through striving to complete
the DTP will probably steer the future of it and how it can be carried out in the best way
possible.
Implications for Initial English Language Teacher Education
The education provided to PSEFLTs both on-campus and at schools needs to becomprehensive, of high quality and adaptable to a wide range of situations subsuming the
mandatory DE that may result from a pandemic. The entire world has suffered from COVID19 over the last seven months and this led the Faculties of Education to produce a solution to
the problem of the impossibility of conducting TP face-to-face as a result of the closure ofschools. The solution they worked out was having the last year pre-service teachers do theirTPs at a distance. As could be comprehended from the perceptions of this study’s participants,
meticulous work needs to be done on designing DTP jointly with PSEFLTs. Anything, fromthe content to the assignments, should be tentative because the feedback that will be offered by
PSEFLTs might necessitate something that has not been contemplated before. Since theopportunity for practicing teaching is what makes TP valuable, virtual teaching practice needs

121Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

to be an integral and indispensable part of DTP. PSEFLTs should be teaching students they aresupposed to teach face-to-face in a virtual synchronous learning environment, and feedback on
their teaching should be provided both by their mentor teachers and university supervisors.
Online technologies should be used in the teaching of pedagogical and content courses, too tohelp PSEFLTs perceive DE as a part of their education.
Conclusions
This qualitative case study explored PSEFLTs’ perceptions concerning the DTP they have done
and the influence it has wielded on their preparedness for teaching. The findings reported thatthe participants were not feeling ready for the first year of teaching as they could not practiceteaching and complete their TPs in their placement schools thereof. The findings reiterate thevital role taken on by TP in the eyes of pre-service teachers. This study has the potential to
make a notable contribution to the literature on TP by the findings as to the negative effect of
the way TP was conducted at a distance in the context of this study.
Since this research was conducted with the participation of 25 participants studying at the same
university, the researcher does not aim at generalizing the results to other contexts.
Undoubtedly, further research is needed to gain more considerable insights into PSEFLTs’
conceptions of both DTP and its influence on their preparedness for the first year on the job.
Moreover, additional research should be conducted in the following years with the practicing
teachers having engaged in DTP with a view to examining how it will have impacted on theirteaching in their first year/s of teaching. Large-scale studies in which participants with DTP
experience from different contexts take part are also needed for they could demonstrate if thedivergence in participants’ views on DTP resides in the differences in the way/s DTP is carried
out.

122

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

References
Adams, G. (2017). Using a narrative approach to illuminate teacher professional learning inan era of accountability. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 161–170.
https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.007
Adem, A. E. (2009). Teacher training through distance education: IICBA’s experience. Africa
Education Review, 6(1), 174–184. https:/doi.org/10.1080/18146620902857590
Akimov, S., & Malin, M. (2020). When old becomes new: a case study of oral examination
as an online assessment tool. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(8),1205–1221. https:/doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1730301
Anwaruddin, S. M. (2016). ICT and language teacher development in the global south: A
new materialist discourse analysis. Educational Studies, 52(3), 260–278.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/00131946.2016.1169183
Barak, L. O., & Wang, J. (2020). Teacher mentoring in service of preservice teachers’
learning to teach: Conceptual bases, characteristics, and challenges for teacher
education reform. Journal of Teacher Education, (72)1, 86–99.
https:/doi.org/10.1177/0022487119894230.
Boling, E. C., Hough, M., Krinsky, H., Saleem, H., & Stevens, M. (2011). Cutting the
distance in distance education: Perspectives on what promotes positive online learning
experiences. Internet and Higher Education, 15, 118–126.
https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.11.006
Bone, K., Bone, J., Grieshaber, S., & Quinones, G. (2019). A Peer Assisted Learning (PAL)
approach to preservice teacher professional experiences in Australia: Organisational
friendships. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 47(4), 347–360.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2018.1539215
Bose, S. (2013). Integrated teacher education programme for open distance learning: A modelfor development and implementation. Open Learning, 28(2), 120–134.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2013.814534
Carrillo, C., & Flores, M. A. (2020). COVID-19 and teacher education: A literature review of
online teaching and learning practices. European Journal of Teacher Education,
43(4), 466–487. https:/doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1821184
Chien, C. W. (2015). Pre-service English teachers’ perceptions and practice of field
experience and professional learning from expert teachers’ mentoring. Teachers andTeaching: Theory and Practice, 21(3), 328–345.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2014.953817
Choy, D., Wong, A. F. L., Goh, K. C., & Low, E. L. (2014). Practicum experience: Preservice teachers’ self-perception of their professional growth. Innovations in
Education and Teaching International, 51(5), 472–482.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.791552
Cohen, E., Hoz, R., & Kaplan, H. (2013). The practicum in preservice teacher education: A
review of empirical studies. Teaching Education, 24(4), 345–380.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2012.711815
Cowan, J. (1995). The advantages and disadvantages of distance education. In R. Howard(Ed.), Distance education for language teachers (pp. 14–21). Multilingual Matters
Ltd.

123

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches. Sage.
Dahlgren, M. A., & Chiriac, E. H. (2009). Learning for professional life: Student teachers’
and graduate teachers’ views of learning, responsibility and collaboration. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 25, 991–999. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.03.019
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (2000) Handbook of qualitative research. Sage.
Driel, J. H. V., & Berry, A. (2012). Teacher professional development focusing on
pedagogical content knowledge. Educational Researcher, 41(1), 26–28.
https:/doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11431010
Falloon, G. (2011). Making the connection: Moore’s theory of transactional distance and its
relevance to the use of a virtual classroom in a postgraduate online teacher education.
Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(3), 187–209.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2011.10782569
Forbes, D., & Khoo, E. (2015). Voice over distance: A case of podcasting for learning in
online teacher education. Distance Education, 36(3), 335–350.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2015.1084074
Gan, Z., & Lee, F. K. J. (2016). Understanding ESL student teachers’ learning of classroom
practices in the practicum: A case study in Hong Kong. The Asia-Pacific Education
Researcher, 25(2), 251–266. https:/doi.org/10.1007/s40299-015-0258-x
Gebhard, J. G. (2009). The Practicum. In A. Burns & J. C. Richards (Eds.), Second language
teacher education (pp. 250-258). Cambridge University Press.
Gillies, D. (2008). Students perspectives on videoconferencing in teacher education at a
distance. Distance Education, 29(1), 107–118.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/01587910802004878
Gray, C., Wright, P., & Pascoe, R. (2019). “They made me feel like a teacher rather than apraccie”: Sinking or swimming in pre-service drama education. Asia-Pacific Journalof Teacher Education, 47(2), 193–207.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2018.1504279
Grudnoff, L. (2011). Rethinking the practicum: Limitations and possibilities. Asia-Pacific
Journal of Teacher Education, 39(3), 223–234.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2011.588308
Gruenhagen, K., Mccracken, T., & True, J. (1999). Using distance education technologies forthe supervision of student teachers in remote rural schools. Rural Special Education
Quarterly, 18 (3-4), 58–65. https:/doi.org/10.1177/8756870599018003-407
Hall, W. M (1996). Quality teacher education via distance mode: A Caribbean experience.
Journal of Education for Teaching, 22(1), 85–94.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/02607479650038445
Kim, J., Kwon, Y., & Cho, D. (2011). Investigating factors that influence social presence andlearning outcomes in distance higher education. Computers & Education, 57(2),1512–1520. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.02.005
Knowles, M. S. (1968). Andragogy, not pedagogy. Adult Leadership. 16(10), 350–352.
Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy toandragogy. Association Press & Cambridge Book Publishers.

124Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Knowles, M. S. (1984). The adult learner: A neglected species. Gulf Pub. Co.
Lee, K. (2017). Rethinking the accessibility of online higher education: A historical review.
Internet and Higher Education, 33, 15–23.
https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2017.01.001.
Leeferink H., Koopman, M., Beijaard, D., & Ketelaar, E. (2015). Unraveling the complexityof student teachers’ learning in and from the workplace. Journal of Teacher
Education, 66(4), 334–348. https:/doi.org/10.1177/0022487115592163
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
Louws, M. L., Veen, K., Meirink, J. A., & Driel, J. H. (2017). Teachers’ professional learning
goals in relation to teaching experience. European Journal of Teacher Education,
40(4), 487–504. https:/doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2017.1342241
Moorhouse, B. L., & Harfitt, G. J. (2019). Pre-service and in-service teachers’ professional
learning through the pedagogical exchange of ideas during a teaching approach
experience. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 1–15.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2019.1694634
Moyo, N. (2020). COVID-19 and the future of practicum in teacher education in Zimbabwe:
Rethinking the ‘new normal’ in quality assurance for teacher certification. Journal of
Education for Teaching, 46(4), 536–545.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1802702
Nielsen, H. D. (1997). Quality assessment and quality assurance in distance teacher
education. Distance Education, 18(2), 284–317.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/0158791970180207
Offir, B., Lev, Y., & Bezalel, R. (2008). Surface and deep learning processes in distanceeducation: Synchronous versus asynchronous systems. Computers and Education,
51(3), 1172–1183. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.10.009
Phillion, J., Johnson, T., & Lehman, J. D. (2003). Using distance education technologies toenhance teacher education though linkages with K-12 schools. Journal of Computing
in Teacher Education, 20(2), 63–70. https:/doi.org/10.1080/10402454.2003.10784486
Punch, K. (1998). Introduction to social research: Qualitative and quantitative approaches.
Sage.
Ramos, F., Taju, G., & Canuto, L. (2011). Promoting distance education in higher educationin Cape Verde and Mozambique. Distance Education, 32(2), 159–175.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2011.584845
Raygan, A., & Moradkhani, S. (2020). Factors influencing technology integration in an EFL
context: investigating EFL teachers’ attitudes, TPACK level, and educational climate.
Computer Assisted Language Learning.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1839106
Richards, H., Conway, C., Roskvist, A., & Harvey, S. (2013). Foreign language teachers’
language proficiency and their language teaching practice. The Language Learning
Journal, 41(2), 231–246. https:/doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2012.707676
Skylar, A. A., Higgins, K., Boone, R., Jones, P., Pierce, T., & Gelfer, J. (2005). Distanceeducation: An exploration of alternative methods and types of instructional media inteacher education. Journal of Special Education Technology, 20(3), 25–33.
https:/doi.org/10.1177/016264340502000303

125

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and proceduresfor developing grounded theory. Sage.
Sung, E., & Mayer, R. E. (2012). Five facets of social presence in online distance education.
Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1738–1747.
https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.04.014
Tang, S. Y. F., Wong, A. K. Y., & Cheng, M. M. H. (2012). Professional learning in initialteacher education: Vision in the constructivist conception of teaching and learning.
Journal of Education for Teaching, 38(4), 435-451.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2012.688549
Tang, S. Y. F., Wong, A. K. Y., & Cheng, M. M. H. (2016). Configuring the three-way
relationship among student teachers’ competence to work in schools, professional
learning and teaching motivation in initial teacher education. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 60, 344–354. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.09.001
Toom, A., Pietarinen, J., Soini, T., & Phyalto, K. (2017). How does the learning environment
in teacher education cultivate first year student teachers’ sense of professional agency
in the professional community? Teaching and Teacher Education, 63, 126–136.
https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.12.013
Turvey, K. (2012). Constructing narrative ecologies as a site for teachers’ professional
learning with new technologies and media in primary education. E-Learning andDigital Media, 9(1), 113–126. https:/doi.org/10.2304/elea.2012.9.1.113
Ulvik, M., & Smith, K. (2011). What characterises a good practicum in teacher education?
Education Inquiry, 2(3), 517–536. https:/doi.org/10.3402/edui.v2i3.21997
Uribe, S. N., & Vaughan, M. (2017). Facilitating student learning in distance education: A
case study on the development and implementation of a multifaceted feedback
system. Distance Education, 38(3), 288–301.
https:/doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2017.1369005
Yurkofsky, M., Smith, S. B., & Brennan, K. (2019). Expanding outcomes: Exploring varied
conceptions of teacher learning in an online professional development experience.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 82, 1–13. https:/doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.03.002
Zeichner, K. (2010). Rethinking the connections between campus courses and field
experiences in college- and university-based teacher education. Journal of Teacher
Education, 61(1–2), 89–99. https:/doi.org/10.1177/0022487109347671
Corresponding author: Gulten Kosar
Email: gulten.kosar@mku.edu.tr

126

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Teacher Professional Learning Whilst in Quarantine: A Case Study from
China
Kevin Laws
The University of Sydney
Australia
Feng Xun
Tengzhou Zhoudairu Kindergartens
China

127

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Abstract
Transforming two early education centres in China to incorporate the educational philosophyof Maria Montessori is a huge task. To induct teaching staff into Montessori’s philosophy,
pedagogy, and curriculum when their past educational experiences have been formed by a rigid,
traditional model added to the challenge. To further complicate matters the transformation took
place during lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the staff participated in acompletely voluntary capacity whilst in isolation. For this research project the authors collected
data through direct observations, surveys, questionnaires, individual teacher interviews, andfocus group interviews. How online professional learning for 35 staff members was planned,
organised, modified, and undertaken is outlined. Practical and technical issues involved inmoving from face-to-face to online teaching are also included. Teachers reported that the
professional learning program had prepared them well for when the centres reopened and thechildren returned.
Keywords: China, COVID-19, early childhood education, Montessori, quarantine, teacher
professional learning

128

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

This article explores the professional learning of early childhood teachers in two preschools in
Shandong Province, China. The professional learning program was designed to bring aboutmajor and enduring changes to pedagogy and curriculum, and occurred at a time of unique
circumstances associated with the coronavirus pandemic in the first half of 2020.
The term “professional development” of teachers is well understood, however in a growing
number of countries the term “professional learning” is gaining currency (O’Brien & Jones,
2014) and will be used in this article. The Organisation for Economic Co-Operation andDevelopment [OECD] definition of teacher professional development/learning encapsulates
the concepts which have been identified as contributing to successful and effective teacher
professional learning:
Effective professional development is on-going, includes training, practiceand feedback, and provides adequate time and follow-up support. Successfulprogrammes involve teachers in learning activities that are similar to ones
they will use with their students, and encourage the development of teachers’
learning communities (OECD, 2009).
Literature Review
The elements of effective teacher professional learning and development have been the focus
of considerable research. In a wide-ranging review of the literature on teacher professional
development/learning Villegas-Reimers (2003, pp. 119–120) identified the following factors
necessary to create a “culture of support” for successful professional learning: collegiality,
openness, and trust; opportunities and time for inquiry; teachers learning in context.
In a policy brief on teacher professional development in the USA, Kedzior and Fifield (2004)
identified the characteristics of high-quality teacher professional development as including a
focus on content, the provision of opportunities for active learning, collaboration withcolleagues, and responsiveness to teacher needs. Based on a literature review of effective
contexts for teacher professional learning Timperley and colleagues (2007) added an extended
time for opportunities to learn and opportunities to process new understanding, thedevelopment of a learning culture, and the creation of conditions for distributed leadership.
Little (2012) conceptualised good teacher professional learning as being contextualised,
connected to issues of teachers’ practice, encouraging experimentation, collegial andcollaborative, and active as opposed to being “episodic, superficial and disconnected from theirown teaching interests and recurring problems of practice” (p. 22). To be most effective Harrisand Jones (2017) stated that “teachers’ professional learning should be appropriate, timely,
targeted and meaningful” (p. 331).
Based on a literature review of effective approaches to teacher professional development Borko
et al. (2010) stated that professional development content should be situated in practice,focused on student learning, take place in a collaborative learning environment, and involve
teaching practices modelled by the leaders of the professional learning program.
In Turkey, a qualitative study involving elementary school teachers Bayar (2014) found theparticipating teachers identified the characteristics of effective professional learning as
including meeting the teachers’ existing needs, involving teachers in the design and planning

129

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021of the activities, and opportunities for active participation (p. 319). These features also wereidentified in an editorial by Kennedy (2015, p. 1) in the UK.
With specific reference to early childhood education in Australia, Nolan and Molla (2018)
conceptualised professional learning as socially situated practice conducted in a specificcontext. They referred to the four C’s of effective professional learning: context, collegiality,
criticality, and change.
In a recent review of thirty-five “methodological rigorous studies” of effective professional
learning Darling-Hammond et al. (2017, pp. iv-v) identified positive links between effective
teacher professional learning, teacher practices and improved student learning outcomes:
1. The learning is content focused and develops specific pedagogies and teachingstrategies associated with related curriculum content.
2. Teachers are actively involved in designing and trying out teaching strategies thatinvolve the same style of learning they are designing for their students.
3. Opportunities are provided for teachers to share ideas and collaborate while they create
learning communities.
4. Teachers are provided with a clear understanding of what best practices might look likethrough shared curricular models and the modelling of instruction.
5. Professional learning activities and shared expertise focuses on the individual needs ofteachers.
6. The professional learning includes time and space for teachers to reflect, receive input
about, and make changes to their teaching practice.
7. There is adequate time for teachers to learn, practice, and implement new strategies thatfacilitate changes in their practice.
The factors outlined in the seven points identified by Darling-Hammond and colleagues (2017)encapsulate the points made by the authors of previous paragraphs and were used to analyseand structure the professional learning experiences of teachers in two early childhood education
centres (ECE) during the first half of 2020.
Context of the Study
When this study commenced in early February 2020, educational institutions in Shandong
Province, China, were prevented from opening after the Chinese New Year holiday because of
the outbreak of a novel coronavirus in the city of Wuhan. Prior to this, the decision to introduce
a Montessori approach to teaching and learning through a one-week professional learning
program for teachers in the two ECE centres had been planned. The lockdown meant thatteachers were not being paid and the Centre’s Director was not receiving any income from fees.
Nevertheless, all teachers volunteered to continue to participate in the professional learning
program.
For a number of years, the two centres had operated in different areas of the same Chinese city
under the ownership of the Director. Each centre had a Principal as well as teachers and carers,
and their daily management was relatively independent. For each thirty children the teachinggroup consisted of three people, a Head Teacher, a General Teacher and a Carer. The children
were organised into mixed-age groups from 2.5 to 6 years of age. This situation was different
from that which existed in most early childhood centres in China where the number of children
in each class group was larger and the children in each class were in the same age group.

130Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

The professional learning sessions began online in February and continued until June. The
content of the early sessions had been planned but, as the length of time that staff wereprevented from meeting face-to-face increased, the range of topics for professional learning
grew. At first topics were largely determined by the Director, with input from the two
Principals, but over time the specific needs of individuals and groups of staff members wereacknowledged, and these needs became the focus of continuing professional learning activities.
In order to appreciate the challenges confronting the professional learning program it isnecessary to understand the external and internal forces that were impacting upon earlychildhood education in China and, more specifically, in the two centres in late 2019 and theearly months of 2020.
External Factors
In January 2019, the Communist Party of China Central Committee and the State Council
announced that by 2025 preschool education would be available for all children (Zou Shou,
China Daily, 2 January 2019). This decree placed considerable pressure on the existing private
early childhood centres to conform to a fee structure set by the government, in order for thecentres to continue to operate.
At the beginning of 2020, awareness of a novel coronavirus (COVID-19) was recognised by
Chinese authorities. The initial centre of the disease, Wuhan, was shut down, as was much of
China. On 30 January, the World Health Organisation declared COVID-19 a Public Health
Emergency of International Concern, and as a pandemic on 11 March 2020.
Internal Factors
The Director had decided previously that the centres would adopt a modified Montessori
approach to ECE, and that it would be necessary to provide professional learning experiences
for all teachers in the new pedagogy and curriculum. To induct the teaching staff into
Montessori’s philosophy, when their past educational experiences had been formed by a rigid,
traditional model, provided a major challenge. Because of COVID-19 the government closed
access to all educational institutions in China and prevented the gathering of groups of people.
This meant that the mode of delivery for the planned professional learning program for thecentres’ thirty-five staff members had to be modified. Some practical and technical issues
involved in moving from face-to-face to online teaching became apparent. An added issue was
the level of training and the relative inexperience of many of the teachers. A few teachers were
university graduates, but most had undertaken certificate courses or were high school
graduates.
The Decision to Introduce a Montessori Approach
Late in 2018 the Director decided that both centres would be re-organised to implement a
Montessori approach to teaching and learning. She had attended short-term training programs
about progressive approaches to teaching and learning including those of Montessori, Reggio
Emilia and Waldorf and she had read widely from the works of John Dewey, Jerome Bruner
and others.
The Director wrote:
At first, I doubted the feasibility of applying any of these approaches in myschools in a city like my hometown, where parents all think education,
including early childhood education, is about academic performance. … I

131

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

chose the Montessori approach because it gives teachers full practicaltraining to allow them to understand the core of the approach gradually.
Once the decision was made the Director undertook an official Montessori program herself
which provided her with a formal Montessori teaching qualification.
Montessori’s Approach to Education
Montessori’s training as a medical doctor, together with her studies in anthropology,
philosophy, psychology, education, and her experiences in teaching children with mental
disabilities provided her with a background to develop what she considered a “scientificpedagogy”. She wrote:
Our aim in education in general is two-fold, biological and social. From thebiological standpoint we wish to help the natural development of theindividual, from the social standpoint it is our aim to prepare the individual
for the environment. … The education of the senses is most important fromboth of these points of view (1912, p. 150).
She believed in the power of each child to learn through observing and adapting to life
especially in the important first six years of life, and advocated an education that would provide
children with a stimulating environment in which they could “experiment” and learn throughtheir experiences. She designed learning materials to be used in classrooms which allowed
children to identify their errors and learn without being corrected directly by the teacher.
Montessori emphasised the importance of the child in doing “work” (learning) by themselves.
She demanded that a teacher must be a careful and systematic observer of each child in order
to be aware of what and how each child has been learning, and when a child might be ready tograsp the opportunity to move onto different or more complex concepts.
Montessori saw a child’s natural development as taking steps towards achieving independence
through different “planes of development”. The first plane extended from birth until six yearsof age. In the first three years the child learns through sensory experiences. During the second
half of the first plane, a child learns in a more conscious way by being encouraged to actively
do things on their own (Montessori, 1912, p. 150).
Montessori wrote about a “new pedagogy” which has important implications for teachers.
It is my belief that the thing we should cultivate in our teachers is more thespirit than the mechanical skill [of teaching] … we wish to awaken in themind and the heart of the educator an interest in natural phenomena (1949,
pp. 28–29).
To be able to achieve this the school must be set up in such a way that a child may be observedin a systematic, yet unobtrusive way. She believed the teacher’s task was not to talk at thechildren, but to prepare activities, based on specifically designed materials which would assist
children to act and think for themselves. The child would be free to select the activity andmaterials that caught their attention at any time (Montessori, 1949, p.229). In this context what
is commonly thought of as a “lesson” becomes an experiment for the child. Any guidance132

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

offered by the teacher should be brief, simple, and aimed at assisting the child to achieve thechild’s objective.
Implementing a Montessori Approach
In the centres about two hours every morning was spent using Montessori teaching and learning
activities and materials. During this time each child had access to a range of learning materials,
some devised by Montessori over 100 years ago, supplemented by newer materials created byteachers, but based on Montessori principles. Each piece of learning material was designed to
produce a specific learning outcome for an individual child. Some newer materials reflected
the influence of Chinese traditional art, festivals, and local cultures.
The learning materials were laid out on shelves which were easy for the children to access. The
children were free to choose any of the materials which interested them and to spend as muchtime as they wished using them. During this time the teacher systematically observed individual
children and recorded his/her observations in order to understand their learning anddevelopmental needs. In the afternoon, group activities which involved music, art, language,
and personal safety were organised according to the ages of the children.
There was a considerable difference in the level of qualifications and experience among thestaff. Four had a bachelor’s degree or above, while two-thirds of the staff either had a college
diploma or vocational school certification. A few had only completed high school. Some havetaught in traditional schools for a number of years, but others have only taught in schools for ashort time. The Director made the following comment:
Young teachers, who form the majority of our teacher group, don’t have theexperience of self-learning as they were taught in a traditional way. They
have little idea of how to stimulate the children’s active learning.
A persistent issue for most early childhood centres in China is a constant turnover of staff, withfew staying for more than one or two years. According to a report in the China Daily (2 January,2020) the shortage of public kindergartens and teachers can be attributed to the poor pay, heavy
responsibilities, and pressures from the children’s parents. The Director expressed a desire forteachers to stay for at least three years so they could work with the same group of children
through the whole of Montessori’s first plane of development.
Research Methods
This study, which took place over four months in the first half of 2020, is a qualitative casestudy and is interpretive in nature (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). It was conducted by the Directorof the two ECE centres. It is a requirement of the Chinese Government that teachers undertake
professional learning activities on a regular basis and that a record be kept of these activities.
This record of activities, together with the Director’s observations, reflections and interactions
with teachers through individual interviews and focus group interviews and a survey into
teachers’ preferred modes of professional learning, form the basis of this study. Apart from theidentity of the Director, no individual member of staff can be identified. The results wereanalysed by using the seven elements of effective professional learning identified by DarlingHammond et al. (2017). A limitation of this study is that it reports on the professional learning
program developed for the teachers, but it does not report on how the program changed teachingpractices. This will form the basis of a future study

133

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

The professional learning activities for all staff were conducted online each morning for about
one-and a-half to two hours from early February until June while the schools were closed, andall teachers were isolated from each other in their own homes. Most of the staff members’learning activities were shared using “live broadcast” within the learning group on the Ding
Ding app. This meant that teachers could listen to presenters and view PowerPoint slides, but
questions to the presenter had to be typed into a message and sent separately in order to be readand answered. The computer screen showed the presenter in the upper right corner of the screenand questions appeared on another part of the screen. This approach caused some difficulties
for discussions, but alternative approaches, such as video conferencing, proved less successful
because of bandwidth issues and the lack of suitable software.
Results
The results of the study are reported under two headings related to the timing of the professional
learning activities and staff reactions: February-March, and April-June.
Phase 1: February-March
The first three professional learning sessions outlined what was involved in the Montessori
approach and illustrated how it differed from traditional Chinese education. The sessions
included the essentials of the Montessori approach and the different role for teachers. Teachers
were presented with ways of building a Montessori environment in their classrooms. Thesesessions were mostly theoretical and involved introducing elements of Montessori’s
philosophy in a didactic manner, although there were opportunities for questions andcomments. A very important part of the Montessori approach is the observation of an individual
child whilst interacting with the learning materials. Teachers were instructed on how to observein a non-intrusive manner, and how to record a child’s reactions towards and with the materials
in a systematic and regular manner. As an essential part of the first three sessions teachers wereintroduced to Montessori’s ideas of regulation and freedom of the children.
The succeeding sessions were more practical in their focus but difficult to conduct because theteachers were isolated from one another. Experienced teachers demonstrated and discussed
how they used traditional Montessori materials for all teachers to observe. This was particularly
useful for the less experienced teachers as they were encouraged to observe, note, and comment
on what occurred.
Teachers were asked to develop hand-made “complementary Montessori” materials to sharewith colleagues. In most of the sessions one teacher presented her new material in a manner
which demonstrated how it might be used in the actual learning environment and what learning
was likely to be achieved by a child “working” with that material.
The content of each of the sessions was found easy to understand and teachers thought the key
points were clearly emphasised and the content of each session clarified their work in theclassroom and inspired their practical work. They thought the presenters made interesting andinformative presentations and answered questions clearly. They especially appreciated the way
in which the presenters focused their main message on the teachers’ everyday work. Overall,
all participants were well satisfied with the professional learning sessions, although a few
indicated they would have liked more interactive activities, however the technology available
did not allow for this to occur at the level which was desired.

134

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

A number of teachers found it very useful to be able to review each session at a later time as
this allowed them to clarify their thinking and reflect upon the important messages, as well as
picking up on points they may have missed initially. They indicated that when participating asa member of a group of 35 and interacting spontaneously it was difficult to grasp thesignificance of everything that was said.
After the initial three sessions it was decided that the following sessions should have a specificfocus resulting in teachers being provided with focus questions to consider in preparation for
the next day’s session. Some key readings were also provided to stimulate their thinking. These
measures assisted teachers, especially those with less experience, and provided a definite focus
for each professional learning session.
Table 1: Details of selected professional learning sessions based on Director’s notes
Time
11Feb.
(Day 1)

Topic of learning activities
Presentation: “The basic theories of Montessori
education” followed by question and answers

Presenter
Director

Learners
Allteachers

13 Feb.
(Day 3)Presentation: Observation and recording,
freedom and regulation”
Homework: Come to session with questions
about basic theories of Montessori education
Discussion: questions about teaching the areaof Practical Life in Montessori classroom
Sharing: hand-made materials for the area
Homework: hand-made traditional Montessori
sensorial material called “Pink Tower”
1.Question raised by teachers
2. Showing pictures of Constructive Triangles
II hand-made by each teacher
3. Sharing the making process
4.Three teachers demonstrate the process using
their hand-made materials in a live session or avideo recording uploaded to the online learninggroup
5. Discussion about the session and theuploaded video
6. Homework: 1) singing practice; 2) handmade traditional Montessori sensorial material
called Constructive Triangles III

DirectorAllteachersAnexperienced
teacher
One principal

Allteachers

18Feb.
(Day 6)25 Feb.
(Day 11)
4 March(Day 18)

Activity 1.
discussed byteachers anddirectorAllteachers
Allteachers

Activities 26. conductedby anexperienced
teacher

Two formal evaluations of the professional learning activities were undertaken in this phase.
In late February, a survey was distributed to all teachers and towards the end of March focus
group discussions were held involving all teachers, followed by separate focus group
discussions with specific groups of teachers, and individual meetings with beginning teachers.
The survey indicated that the majority of teachers spent three or more hours on the first three
sessions which focused on the basic theory of Montessori education, Montessori environment
and materials, and methods of observing and recording children’s learning. All teachersreported that the online presentations assisted them to understand Montessori’s approach, but

135

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

most teachers found the sessions on the development and use Montessori materials were themost useful.
When surveyed about the forms of professional learning they preferred, the teachers indicatedthey preferred online synchronous lessons and interactive learning approaches best. The 31
respondents were able to choose one preferred form of professional learning, or as many asthey wished.
Table 2: Teachers’ preferred modes of professional learning
Mode of professional learning
Online live (synchronous) sessions
Online interactive learning
Off-line interactive learning
Workshops or seminars
Professional reading
Face-to-face presentations

Numbers selecting each mode
22 (1 person chose only this form)
22 (2 people chose only this form)
22 (1 person chose only this form)
20
17
14 (2 people chose only this form)

In the second part of this phase emphasis was placed upon developing materials based uponMontessori principles, and focus group discussions began. The majority of comments fromteachers indicated their interest was stimulated by the learning materials other teachers had
prepared, as well as developing a renewed interest in their own learning and their deeper
understanding of Montessori principles. Teachers commented:
I have become more skilful in operating these materials than before. My
memory [of how they should be used] was somewhat fading away, and now
it is refreshed (A Head Teacher).
At the beginning I participated in making new materials because I’m a leaderof a teaching group so I must make my presentation for our teachers as apositive role model. But eventually, I found it has become more and moreinteresting, so I make everything with a passion (A Head Teacher).
Making teaching materials improved my concentration and dug out mypotential. I did not think I could be so good. In the past I was a very carelessperson. When [my supervisor] saw my work she said she had got to know adifferent me (A less experienced teacher).
The focus group discussions with the less experienced teachers provided some additional
insights into their uncertainties and lack of experience. Despite encouragement from presenterssome of the younger teachers felt shy and uncertain about contributing to the discussions andasking questions publicly. The following comments from less experienced teachers indicate
this:
I wanted to listen to other teachers about how to answer first and then answer
myself. But by then the discussion had moved to the next question too quickly.
In spite of this, listening to the issues that teachers discussed together was very useful:136Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Listening to the teacher’s story about their class and the teacher’s answers isvery helpful. In the future, if I encounter such children or such situations, I
will know how to help them. I have learned some methods from otherteachers’ experiences.
Some less experienced teachers were concerned that different teachers used the learningmaterials in slightly different ways. This confused them because they seemed to think that there
was only one correct way to use the materials. Some beginning teachers commented:
I found that teachers have their own operating habits, and there aredifferences. I hoped to have a unified approach which I could follow in the
future.
and,When we watched the replays of live broadcasts, some teachers presented
materials in different ways. We got confused and don’t know which one iscorrect.
This reflects their reliance upon their previous experience associated with didactic approaches
to teaching and learning. However, it was obvious that less experienced teachers found thesessions useful and one suggested that the broadcasts and videoconferences could betransferred to videos. This would allow the teachers to re-watch and re-listen to presentations
and discussions and help overcome the problems of poor computer connections. This would
help them clarify issues that were missed while they tried to be active in the discussions.
A written comment by the Director towards the end of March provides a positive view of theresults of the program at that time:
This morning I was so surprised by the quality of the hand-made materials
the teachers made at home. They are so sophisticated. It has been such a joy
to be involved in the teachers’ experience-sharing in the morning learning
sessions. I believe this group is so much better than before. It is so unexpected
but a great achievement while we’re losing so much during the pandemic.
This keeps me feeling hopeful and that we will be successful in being able tobattle this most difficult situation that we have ever met.
Phase 2: April-June
During April and May discussion groups and online learning activities continued. Specialised
online discussions and activities were set up for different groups of teachers. These groups
were led by the Director and the two Principals and focused on the different work and needs ofclusters of teachers.
In April a series of sessions for the Principals and Head Teachers began. When asked to suggest
issues which would form the basis of these sessions, they identified the following:
•
•
•
•
•

How to understand children better through observing their behaviours;
How to improve leadership;
The methods of developing children’s abilities;
How to build up better trust with parents through communication;
How to organise the daily work better;

137

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic•••

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

The management of a Montessori class;
How to build a cohesive and energetic team;
How to deal with an injured child.

Materials on each issue were prepared and the Head Teachers were provided with one or two
readings prior to each session. Head Teachers were encouraged to use their previous
experiences to provide “real” scenarios for discussion. Details of selected sessions based on
the Director’s notes are presented below:
Table 3: Selected professional learning sessions for Head Teachers
Time
24
March
(Day 1)

Learning Activities
1. Participants vote for the issues that concern
them most to choose the contents for theirlearning that could most help them at theirposition in the centres

Presenter
Director

Learners
Head
Teachers
andPrincipals

31
March
(Day 2

1. Presentation: Team Cohesion and Personal
Leadership:• Understand yourself better• Teambuilding and cohesion• Core management skills and leadership
2. Interaction with learners about:
What kind of person am I?
3. Homework: Describe your strengths andweaknesses. Devise a plan to improve yourstrengths and overcome your weaknesses.
Presentation: Team Work and Efficiency
Management• Time management• Plan-making• Power of regulation
Homework:• Prioritising your work
• Short term and long-term goals for yourteam
• Describe a conflict among children andprepare your language to help solve theproblem
Discussion: Studying the book “Understanding
and Positive Guidance of Children”• Indoor environment that suits children’sdevelopment• Positive communication• Effective interference of behaviour
guidance.
• Real examples

Director

Head
Teachers
andPrincipals

Director

Head
Teachers
andPrincipals

Director

Head
Teachers
andPrincipals

2 April(Day 3)10 April(Day 5)138

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Towards the end of May some less experienced teachers were becoming aware of the pressure
parents were likely to put on them once the children returned. They wondered how they might
gain parents’ trust. The young teachers were aware that the Montessori method was very
different to what they had experienced in their own education. They thought it might be difficult
to convince parents that the children were learning because it might appear that the children
were “playing” with materials rather than “learning”. The Director, together with the two
Principals decided that the parents needed to be aware of the basis of the Montessori approachand to accept it as the way in which learning now takes place in the two ECE centres. The
Director planned to have meetings for parents once the coronavirus quarantine was lifted to
explain the processes involved in a Montessori approach. In the meantime, parents were
provided with online materials which explained Montessori education.
Over the period of physical isolation necessitated by COVID-19, the Director provided someinsights into staff reactions to being isolated physically from colleagues and the children.
The morale and cohesion of the whole teacher team has been considerablyincreased since we started the online program. … I don’t know the exact
reason but strongly feel it might be because of the difficulties everybody
shares right now … We realise it is better to stay with the groups we are in to
support [each other] …. It may give each other more security when everybody
feels the stress from the uncertainty spreading in the whole society.
In the past the Director had found it difficult to stimulate much discussion during face-to-faceprofessional learning sessions. She suggested that this could have been due to her role as the
Director as well as the trainer. Part of the way through the online professional learning program
she stated:
There are so many more teachers involved in discussion now online. They canhave some preparation before each discussion. … It wasn’t like this at the
beginning of the online sessions, [but] we decided to give teachers notice anda few related questions to think about in advance. I found the group
discussion online is so different.
The regular online sessions involving practical exercises increased the level of teachers’
personal communications, especially among experienced teachers. The Head Teachers now
understood that they had a role to play in leading younger colleagues in understanding why andhow the Montessori approach leads to a special kind of children’s learning.
Teachers chosen to demonstrate online how they used the learning materials with children took
their role very seriously. They conferred with other experienced teachers prior to theirdemonstration to ensure that the details they provided were accurate and clearly expressed. As
the Director states, this unexpected outcome seems to have contributed to group learning in aself-motivating way. A learning community was developing.
An important reason that the teachers, as unpaid volunteers, continued their involvement in the
program after the planned one-week was that, as they were in isolation, they looked forward to
the opportunity to see and hear their colleagues on a regular basis.
The Director could see many advantages to online learning. She stated:

139

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

I’d seriously consider using this form of learning (online) regularly in the
future, in addition to our usual face-to-face professional learning activities.
Analysis and Discussion
The results of this study are analysed through the seven elements of effective professional
learning programs identified by Darling-Hammond et al. (2017).
Content-Focused
Effective professional learning involves teaching strategies and specific pedagogies which areassociated with specific curriculum content (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017 pp. 5–7). It wasplanned that the two ECE centres adopt a modified Montessori approach to education. In theearly stages of the teachers’ learning program, they were introduced to the philosophy andprinciples of the Montessori method with emphasis on “the education of the senses”. In later
sessions some specific approaches advocated for teaching reading, writing, language, andnumeration were introduced. Teachers worked with special materials developed on Montessori
principles and through this began to understand what Montessori was trying to achieve throughher pedagogical methods and materials.
Active Learning
Effective professional learning provides opportunities for teachers to design and try out newteaching strategies and to engage in the same style of learning they are designing for theirstudents (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017, pp. 7–9). After an introduction to Montessori’s
philosophy of education and child development, all activities had a practical emphasis.
Teachers were given tasks to develop materials which could be used to produce the types oflearning advocated by Montessori. During each session selected teachers would explain how
they developed materials, and they also demonstrated online how they would use the materials
with children. Given the nature of the situation under which the professional learning took
place it was not possible for teachers to physically practice the new materials with children,
however, teachers gained confidence in their own ability to adapt to the Montessori method.
Collaboration
Effective professional learning helps teachers create communities of learners which can change
the culture of instruction by providing time and space for the sharing of ideas (DarlingHammond et al., 2017, pp. 9–11). Although teachers were separated by distance, they wereunited in sharing the presentations and discussions that occurred during the online sessions. A
high degree of collaboration was developed because of the regularity of the meetings which
led to teachers becoming more familiar with each other as individuals. As the isolation
restrictions were eased small groups of teachers were able to begin to meet face-to-face. The
special series of sessions for Head Teachers were developed specifically to meet their espoused
needs. As a result of allowing Head Teachers to meet online and face-to-face they developed
their own learning community. These communities showed how Head Teachers might become
pedagogical leaders for the other two members in each of their groups.
Models of Effective Practice
Effective professional learning involves teachers developing a clear understanding of what
appropriate professional practice might look like as well as providing opportunities for teachers
to share stories of actual teaching events (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017, pp. 11–12). During
the online meetings teachers were encouraged to share positive examples of their teachingpractice. Although it was mainly the more experienced teachers who were able to do this, newer

140Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

teachers learned from the practical stories of their colleagues. When demonstrating how they
thought new materials might be used in the classroom teachers used effective practices andalso elicited possible modifications from other teachers.
Expert Support
Effective professional learning focuses directly upon the individual needs of teachers, allows
them to share personal expertise, and provides appropriate support from experts (DarlingHammond et al., 2017, pp. 12–14). Having graduated with a professional qualification in theMontessori approach to education the Director was able to answer questions and clarify what
the materials and activities were designed to achieve. She was supported in this by her two
Principals. The provision of expert support was most important because the Montessori
approach is so different to what most teachers had experienced throughout their own schooling.
Two areas of concern for some teachers were how to maintain discipline in the classroom andhow to respond to parents who questioned the Montessori approach. Discipline in theclassroom can only become a practical reality once the classes are in operation. The teachers
understand, in theory, Montessori’s approach that a child developing self-discipline occurs
through an understanding of how their behaviour might impact upon others in the classroom.
Convincing parents of the advantages of a Montessori education is a task for the Director andthe two Principals. In order to achieve this objective, the Director is conducting meetings withparents to explain what, how, and why certain things are important in the education of theirchildren.
Feedback and Reflection
Effective professional learning involves teacher reflection and allows time for teachers to think
about their practice (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017, pp. 14–15). Although there were sometechnical difficulties in providing instant feedback during the group online sessions, these
difficulties were overcome to a certain extent when it was possible to organise discussions for
special groups. One outcome from the online sessions was that teachers were able to review
and reflect upon what happened during each session. Many teachers liked the fact that they
could re-watch the sessions at a later time. While they were participants in real-time sessions
there was no time to think about what they had observed, nor was there time for reflection. Rewatching provided for thinking and reflecting.
Sustained Duration
Effective professional learning provides adequate time for learning. It consists of multiple
opportunities for learning over a sustained time period (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017, p. 15).
For four months teachers interacted with each other on an almost daily basis, discussing
professional issues and clarifying for themselves what the Montessori approach meant for themand the children they were to teach. Prior to this, teachers from each centre used to meetseparately at the end of each week, and both centres met together every two months. From theteachers’ comments, much was gained from the regularity of the sessions they spent together
online, but physically apart. The stresses of being unable to socialise, or do the things they
liked to do, and being unable to work face-to-face was, in part, overcome by the feeling thatthey were not alone and that others were having similar feelings. The fact that they knew they
could interact with colleagues who were in the same predicament on a regular basis wasreassuring.

141

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Conclusion
The professional learning program was initially planned to be implemented over a one-weekperiod. During this time teachers at two early childhood education centres in Shandong
province, China would learn about the Montessori approach, and the philosophy underpinningits pedagogy and curriculum. As a result of the government requirement for individuals toquarantine themselves for an indeterminate length of time the program grew and developed
into a highly practical experience. The mode of delivering the program was rapidly adaptedfrom face-to-face to online learning.
Teachers’ comments after their professional learning program indicated that they felt preparedto implement a learning program for children which is different to that which they had
experienced as students. A greater sense of collegiality was developed during the months ofprofessional learning, and teachers were able to develop closer relationships with each other.
The teaching group structure of three people, Head Teacher, Teacher, and Carer was very
important, especially for professional learning in the future. Each member of each group got toknow other members better and came to understand their colleagues’ strengths and weaknesses.
A factor which contributed to the success of the professional learning project was the ability of
the Director to see opportunities the extended period of professional learning presented. Thisadditional time allowed for the development of a more extensive program involving input fromstaff members, and the consideration of issues which otherwise could not have been addressed.
At the beginning of June, when the children were permitted to return to the centres, the teachersreported that they felt refreshed and were eager to try out the things they had learned.
The elements of effective professional learning identified by Darling-Hammond et al. (2017)
were reflected in the literature consulted and the seven elements were found to provide a usefulstructure for the analysis of the results of the program. What remains to be determined is theimpact the professional learning program has had on teachers’ practices in the classroom oncethe children return.

142

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

References
Bayar, A. (2014) The components of effective professional development activities in terms ofteachers’ perspectives. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 6 (2),319–327. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2014.02.006
Borko, H., Jacobs, J. & Koellner, K. (2010) Contemporary approaches to teacher professional
development. In P. Peterson, E. Baker, & B. McGaw (Eds), International
encyclopedia of education, (7, pp. 548–556). Elsevier Science.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-6_127-1
Darling-Hammond, L. and Richardson, N. (2009). Research review/Teacher learning: Whatmatters? How Teachers Learn, 66 (5), 46–53.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R.C., Andree, A. Richardson, N. & Orphanos, S. (2009).
Professional learning in the learning profession: Teacher development in the UnitedStates and abroad. National Staff Development Council.
https://doi.org/10.1.1.180.6634
Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., and Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional
development. Learning Policy Institute.
https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/teacher-prof-dev
Harris, A. & Jones, M. (2017) Leading professional learning: putting teachers at the centre.
School Leadership & Management (Editorial), 37 (4). 331–333.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2017.1343705
Kedzior, M. & Fifield, S. (2004) Teacher professional development. Education Policy Brief,
15, (May). Education Research & Development Centre, University of Delaware.
https://udspace.edel.edu/handle/19716/245
Kennedy, A. (2015) ‘Useful’ professional learning … useful for whom? Professional
Development in Education (Editorial), 41 (1), 1–4.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2014983787
Little, J. (2012) Professional community and professional development in the learning-centredschool. In M. Kooy & K. van Veen (Eds.), Teacher learning that matters: International
perspectives, pp. 22–46. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203805879
Merriam, B. & Tisdell, E. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation.
(4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Montessori, M. (1912). The Montessori method: scientific pedagogy as applied to childeducation in the Children’s Houses. (Translated by A.E. George) Frederick A. Stokes.
https://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/momtessori/method/method.html
Montessori, M. (1949). The absorbent mind. Theosophical Publishing House.
https://gseuphsdlibrary.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/the-absorbent-mindmontessori.pdf
Nolan, A. & Molla, T. (2018) Teacher professional learning in early childhood education:
Insights from a mentoring program. Early Years, 38 (3), 258–270.
https://doi.org/10/1080/09575146.1259212

143

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (2009). The professional
development of teachers. In Creating effective teaching and learning environments:
first results from TALIS. OECD. 47–79.
https://www.oecd.org/education/school/43023606.pdf
O’Brien, J. & Jones, K. (2014). Professional learning or professional development?
Orcontinuing professional learning and development? Changing terminology, policy
and practice. Professional Development in Education, 40 (5), 683–687.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2014.960688
Timperley, H., Wilson, A., Barrar, H. & Fung, I. (2007) Teacher professional learning anddevelopment: Best evidence synthesis iteration. Ministry of Education.
http://educationcounts.edcentre.govt.nz/goto/BES
Villegas-Reimers, E. (2003). Teacher professional development: an international review of theliterature. UNESCO, International Institute for Educational Planning.
www.unesco.org/iiep
Zou Shou (2019). New policies ease access to kindergarten. China Daily. Updated 2 January
2019.
Corresponding author: Kevin Laws
Contact email: kevin.laws@sydney.edu.au144

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Using a Design Thinking Approach for an Asynchronous Learning
Platform during COVID-19
Lori Severino
Drexel University
USA
Mark Petrovich
Drexel University
USA
Samantha Mercanti-Anthony
Drexel University
USA
Samuel Fischer
Read by 4th
USA

145

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic abruptly shut down schools in an urban based school district in the
Spring of 2020. As the closures persisted over months, an immediate educational need arosefor online curricula that could help alleviate the learning gaps caused by the shutdown. The
purpose of this study was to create a process and model for the development of a fully
asynchronous online learning environment for prekindergarten through 2nd grade students that
could help other districts implement similar projects. Since the turnaround time fordevelopment and implementation was a matter of weeks the project team used an iterative
process to solve a “wicked problem” and identified solutions to create an improved user
experience. A modified design thinking model approach was developed through the process ofdeveloping this six-week, theme based virtual curriculum that included interactivities in early
literacy, writing, reading comprehension, science and math. This adjusted model includes 6
stages: discover, interpretation, ideation, experimentation, implementation, and evolution. This
research focuses on the processes involved during each of the stages and the resulting use by
the intended audience. The curriculum was used by over 5,800 prekindergarten through second
grade students during the 6-week period of the summer of 2020. The online platform continues
to be used by students presently.
Keywords: asynchronous, COVID-19, curriculum, design-thinking model, early grades

146

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Out-of-school summer learning differences substantially account for achievement gaps related
to family income levels, commonly termed as the “Summer slide” (Alexander et. al., 2007).
However, recent research takes advantage of advances in vertically scaled tests to clarify thatthe bulk of 9th grade student achievement inequity is present in kindergarten. Therefore,
summer learning, while not the source of inequity, may still be a valuable and effective strategy
at remediating inequity if it is targeted at the early grades (von Hippel et al., 2018). With thesurge of cases of COVID-19 and the abrupt in-person school closures in the Spring of 2020,
schools began rethinking summer programming. Many policy makers approached the sudden
shift to online learning, and disconnection from traditional instructional time, through the lensof summer learning loss. In the late spring of 2020, predictions about the COVID learning loss
were widely publicized (Dorn, 2020). Investments in summer learning and remediation were
stressed, and investments and programs followed. However, despite research that underlines
the importance of early learning, many summer programs were targeted at children 3rd grade
and up. This was true for a large urban school district in the Northeast United States thatplanned to offer an online summer learning curriculum for 3rd through 12th grades in responseto the COVID-19 school closures; however, the district did not have the capacity to create
virtual programming for kindergarten through 2nd grade students. The importance of early
grade summer learning, exacerbated by a national pandemic, prompted the Read by 4thCampaign (a non-profit coalition of organizations and individuals, with a strategic mission of
ensuring all children in their city are reading on grade level by the 4th grade) to convene its
partners around the shared goal of making a self-guided PreK through 2nd-grade virtual
curriculum. All activities in the developed curriculum were to be aligned with the school
district’s English Language Arts standards and science/social studies themes from the Spring2020 quarter. The goals were to make up for lost learning from March through the end of theschool year and strengthen the reading skills for students completing grades PreK - 2. Named“The Ultimate Summer Learning Adventure”, the curriculum was made available for free toall starting June 28, 2020.
The purpose of this study was to create a process and model for the development of a fully
asynchronous online learning environment for prekindergarten through 2nd grade students that
could help other districts implement similar projects.
The project team consisted of both the curricular and design teams as well as representatives
from the local school district, city library, and the local public television station. The
curriculum team included content experts in literacy and mathematics from the local university,
The Philadelphia Writing Project, Teach Plus and First Up, and their primary responsibility
was to develop content for each grade level band and identify resources for curriculum lessons.
The design team was made up of two instructional design specialists and one media specialist
with the primary responsibility for the transformation of the curriculum team’s content to aninteractive web-based learning environment. Through their work together, the curriculum teamand the design team realized that while much was known about the content that ought to belearned in the curriculum, there was not a large body of knowledge about the appropriate designof the website that would carry it, or the right process for realizing the work. The design team
therefore took an iterative process approach to implement the online learning curriculum. This
manuscript explores the design process for the Ultimate Summer Learning Adventure and thepatterns of use that resulted. The authors believe it will be valuable for the field as it has
valuable lessons about an iterative team design approach from process and product for early
grades.

147

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Through this rapid iterative design process, a new model for a design thinking approach to
instructional design emerged. The questions below guided the work as we explored a newmodel that illuminates how a team-based approach, with various feedback loops, can create
design that improves the virtual user experience and subsequent learning practices:
1. How did the team create this online learning platform?
2. What challenges did the team face when creating this online learning platform?
3. How did user data (from Google site) and feedback influence the design process?
Literature Review
Effects of COVID-19 on Teaching and Learning
A core finding from global education research over the past three decades has focused on the
educator’s impact on student learning in the classroom. Despite several variables, what teachers
do in the classroom has been shown to have the largest single impact on student learning
outcomes (Muijs et al., 2014). In March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic introduced
unprecedented challenges in teaching and learning from the traditional classroom format.
Across the globe, educators were required to adapt to distance education as schools observedsocial distancing protocols and limited face-to-face interaction. This prompt transition offeredlittle time for educators to adapt existing lesson plans, learn best-practices in distanceeducation, or develop proficiency with now-required educational technology. Studies
administered since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic have demonstrated that teachers
believe they were not prepared to teach in remote settings (DeWitt, 2020). One such survey of
908 teachers and district leaders across the US found that teachers reported spending up to 71%
less time on student instruction while 87% of teachers reported an increase in the amount oftime spent troubleshooting problems with technology (Herold & Yettick, 2020). As a result,teachers voiced concerns about the sudden expectations that had been asked of them(Comanducci, 2020). They were concerned with the difficulties caused by their unfamiliarity
with remote teaching and learning tools as well as a lack of immediate feedback offered whilein traditional face to face classrooms.
A survey of more than 12,000 teachers from South Carolina was conducted in June 2020, just
3 months after country-wide school closures in the US (Berry, 2020). While teachers reported
being deeply committed to making a successful shift to remote instruction, many felt theystruggled to reach their students during this period of “emergency instruction”. Despite this,when presented with the reality of no high stakes testing or assessment, many teachers saw
possibilities to integrate creativity, leadership, and the opportunity to cultivate engagement
within students’ homes. In considering key findings from remote education during COVID-19,
the Education Endowment Foundation’s (2020) rapid evidence assessment on remote learning
found that: teaching quality is more important than how lessons are delivered; ensuring accessto technology is key, particularly for disadvantaged pupils; peer interactions can provide
motivation and improve learning outcomes; supporting pupils to work independently can
improve learning outcomes; and different approaches to remote learning suit different tasks
and types of content. While schools sought ways to adapt to the challenges of emergency
remote education, educators struggled to keep students engaged with the learning opportunities
they had become accustomed to in the classroom. As a result of struggles with remoteeducation, many educators reported that students did not participate in online environments tocomplete assignments (DeWitt, 2020; Herold & Yettick, 2020). Dorn and colleagues (2020)
suggest that this type of learning slowdown could hinder students in ways that equate up toeleven months of lost schooling when compared to traditional face-to-face modalities. Those

148

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

numbers increase to almost fourteen months of lost schooling when students do not participate
in any remote instruction, depending on when face-to-face instruction resumes. To remediate
the effects of emergency remote instruction, schools, educators, and researchers sought avariety of methods to approach the pandemic’s new normal. New educational programs,
instructional methods, and guiding frameworks emerged as a response to education during
COVID-19.
Remote Learning Opportunities During the COVID-19 Pandemic
In Spring 2020, countries worldwide were presented with the necessity of emergency remoteeducation in response to the COVID-19 global pandemic. Given the lack of preparation orplanning for this transition to remote education, schools, educators, and researchers sought new
approaches to teaching and learning in this “new norm”. In a survey of more than 1,000 K-12
librarians in the United States, over three-quarters of respondents were provided emergency or
supplementary training in online learning (Rodgers, 2020). Librarians reported offering remotesupport in the form of readers’ advisory, research or project assistance, and story time/readaloud opportunities. Over 80% of all respondents planned to offer summer reading programs,
many of whom sought to integrate web-based tools such as the reading system Beanstack forthe first time. A study of 45 preservice school librarians in Spring 2020 sought to identify theeffectiveness of online environments designed by school library candidates (Burns, 2020).
Overall, preservice librarians were largely successful in designing effective online
environments supported by instructional design models and appropriate online pedagogy.
These lessons were not without their shared problems, however, as the difficulty ofsynchronous learning experiences necessitated the implementation of additional asynchronous
offerings as well.
While educators developed new remote programs, parents were also asked to improvise andprovide educational supports for students in new ways. In examining mathematics teaching
and learning during COVID-19, some parents reported improvising by using household items,
finding links to online interactives, or using statistics/graphics about the pandemic to aid
learners in mathematical understanding (Khirwadkar, 2020). Parents also reported several
ongoing challenges related to educational supports in the home including their own lack ofknowledge or pedagogy, the need for increased teacher communication, or lack of accessible
technology or Internet quality (Garbe et al., 2020). A predominant challenge discussed byparents was the struggle to meet disability-related or gifted and talented needs of children now
studying remotely. Smith and Colton (2020) detailed the creation of a YouTube channel for
Deaf/Hard of Hearing (DHH) students. Prior to the pandemic, there existed limited online
teaching resources accessible to DHH students. The transition to online education coupled witha lack of home resources necessitated the construction of a channel which provided
instructional videos to parents and students which was freely accessible throughout the
COVID-19 pandemic. Parents also struggled with the difficulty of the material assigned to theirchildren in a remote schooling environment. Parents cited spending additional time attempting
to differentiate between their child’s educational needs and remote assignments at home while
under normal circumstances these special considerations would fall to an educator (Garbe etal., 2020).
In response to the pandemic, research sought to provide novel approaches for understanding
and supporting learning in emergent crises. Whittle and colleagues (2020) introduced theemergency remote teaching environment (ERTE) framework to provide support for thosefamiliar with pre-planned online instruction. ERTEs differ from more online or distanceeducation experiences as they offer rapidly developed and temporary instructional support in a

149

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

crisis without pre-planned resources or infrastructure (Hodges et al., 2020). The ERTE
framework comprises three steps: inquiry, classifying available resources into constants andvariables, and designing educational experiences. The steps in ERTE are nonlinear and iterative
as the needs presented during a crisis require constant re-evaluation (Whittle et al., 2020).
Despite these contributions from educators, parents, and researchers, the COVID-19 pandemic
represents a “wicked problem” in that the problem is ill-defined and information is often
confusing or unknown (Rittel & Webber, 1973). As a response to “wicked problems”, design
thinking has been utilized to assess fit for all remote stakeholders (e.g., students, teaches, andparents) while offering opportunities to redefine problems and offer alternative approaches to
non-traditional problems.
Design Thinking as a Response to COVID-19
Design thinking has been defined as an analytic and creative process that provides
opportunities to experiment, prototype, gather feedback, and redesign (Razzouk & Shute,2012). It has been described as both process and mindset which can be characterized by anumber of attributes: ambiguity, collaboration, constructiveness, curiosity, empathy, holism,
iteration, non-judgmental way, and openness (Baeck & Gremmett, 2012; Luka, 2014). Dunne
and Martin (2006) suggest that design thinking models represent a cyclical process to solve“wicked problems”. From their perspective, design thinking is a process of induction,
abduction, deduction, and testing. Brown (2008) contrasts this perspective by suggesting thatthe design thinking process consists of a system of spaces as opposed to a series of steps. These
spaces are inspiration, ideation, and implementation. Most notably, Plattner, Meinel, andWeinberg (2009) present a model of design thinking that has been viewed as both stepwise andcyclical. This model is separated into two halves comprised of three individual steps each. The
first phase, problem, consists of understanding, observing, and providing a point of view. The
second phase, solution, involves ideation, prototyping, and testing. This model encourages
interaction between the phases of problem and solution which become linked, either directly
or indirectly, through their unique steps.
Though its foundations reside in engineering, design thinking has steadily grown into the fieldof education. Welsh and Dehler (2012) detailed a design thinking approach to the creation of a
student-centered learning curricula. Their narrative surrounding this process identified design
thinking as a crucial element which encouraged critical analysis for both students and teachers
alike. Luka (2014) presented a discussion on the merits of design thinking (also referred to as
design-based learning in the field of education) and its merits for pedagogy. Though abundantin education broadly, there has been limited research that details the use of design thinking asa response to COVID-19. One example in medical education utilized a rapid design thinking
strategy to develop a response to challenges in medical education and training throughout
remote learning (Thakur, Soklaridis, Crawford, Mulsant, & Sockalingam, 2020). Their modelshows that the educational response to the COVID-19 pandemic may provide an opportunity
for educators and students to adapt towards positive and sustained change. To design anddevelop an online curriculum for PreK-2 students amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, the teamsought to build on the success of prior curriculum development using a design thinking
approach. The following sections will detail our adapted design thinking model and our steps
in moving towards the creation and teaching of an online curriculum.
MethodIn March of 2020, the K-12 community encountered a “wicked problem” and was forced toquickly adapt to a virtual learning environment. While some schools developed an immediate

150Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

plan, others were delayed with the assumption that the face-to-face closure would be in effectfor only a few weeks. An urban district in the northeast section of the United States shut down
their district from March 16th to 27th in response to the outbreak of COVID-19 cases in the
United States. This shutdown was meant for a deep cleaning of facilities, but the district quickly
pivoted to offering remote instruction. This emergency remote teaching environment was inresponse to the pandemic crisis and did not have the infrastructure of a pre-planned learning
environment (Whittle et. al, 2020). In addition, students lacked the necessary hardware andinternet access to learn remotely; therefore, the district delayed remote instruction until
Chromebooks were distributed and internet access areas were established.
This Prekindergarten – grade 2 (Prek-2) online learning project used an iterative, designthinking process in a quick turnaround time due to the impact of COVID-19. In this study, an
exploratory sequential mixed method research design was utilized in order to aid us inreflecting on our own design practices, experiences in creating the virtual course, and thestudents’ experiences in utilizing the course over a six-week period. In an exploratory design,qualitative data is collected and analyzed in order to drive the analysis and interpretation ofquantitative data (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2017; Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2009). At the
beginning of each week, the project team would track progress through weekly meeting notes,
agendas, and content reviews to identify key areas for improvement. For example, the pipeline
for the creation of weekly content and its publication to the interactive web-based application
was developed using this iterative process. Subsequently, Google Analytics user data guided
analysis in how students were using and navigating the application. These descriptive statistics
enabled the project team to gain insight into statistics such as student geographic location andtheir point of access to the web application. For example, the project team was able to makedesign decisions on web application font sizes and amount of content presented per slide dueto the high usage rate of mobile devices (tablets and phones). This iterative process was utilized
throughout the project duration in order to build out the web application and to give insight
into our own design process. Due to the immediacy of the problem and the time constraints,
the team became pragmatic researchers (Onwuegbuzie & Leech, 2007). Since society has not
had the issue of school closures due to the pandemic in over 100 years, this study used an
exploratory approach. The iterative model developed here may be helpful to other designers
and early grade content developers focused on independent virtual learning. The research teamreceived Institutional Review Board ethics approval through the university.
The structure of a design thinking approach (Luka, 2014) is outlined within the process below.
The six-phase design thinking stages – discover, interpretation, ideation, experimentation,
implementation and evolution – highlight how the project team developed the PreK to 2ndgrade web-based curriculum. Variances to our design-based curriculum model were a result of
the guiding questions and interpretations that emerged through project team discussions,
instructional development and indirect user feedback. This section will explore how the processof developing a web-based PreK-2nd grade curriculum resulted in an amended design- basedmodel for development.
DiscoverIn the discover phase of the project, understanding the problem and interpreting the issue were
key. The team needed to determine the immediate curricular needs of rising Kindergarteners,
1st and 2nd graders that would offset the learning gap that occurred due to the COVID-19
shutdown and subsequent remote instruction that followed. A curriculum team was assembled
to include seasoned teachers in Reading, Early Literacy, Writing, Math, and Science. This teamwould become the Subject Matter Experts (SME) for the project.

151

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

The instructional design team along with the SMEs were tasked by an Educational NonGovernment Organization in consultation with the school district of the city, with developing
a six-week curriculum that consisted of three days of instruction for each week. Each day would
consist of lessons for the following subjects: Reading Comprehension, Early Literacy, Writing,Math and Science to total a time of 1 to 1½ hours for each grade level.
Inspiration for the design process came from the multitude of teachers that were quickly
adapting to the online environment and creating Bitmoji classrooms full of lessons andactivities (Gewertz, 2020). Additionally, the continued development of interactive online
software that gamifies and engages the learner inspired both designers and subject matter
experts to develop the project in a way that would attract young learners in the summer months.
Quickly, a team of potential partners that included school district administrators, local librarypartners, subject matter experts and graphic designers was assembled (virtually) to determine
the project’s feasibility and the roles individuals could fill.
Interpretation
Within the interpretation stage, an understanding of the audience and interpretation of the work
is developed. The driving questions of “how do I interpret it” and “who will be the audience”
frames the design approach. In this instance, the “it” is the process of bringing curriculum tolife for the user in a web-based approach. The results of these questions result in the teamdeveloping a persona analysis and a framework to develop the curriculum to teach the newly
defined user based on the persona analysis.
Initially, a meeting of potential partners and contributors included literacy experts, school
district officials, funding partners, and community educational partners such as WHYY (Wider
Horizons for You and Yours) the local PBS station, and the public library helped to determine
the audience and provide guidance on what should be included in the curriculum.
Virtual pre-project meetings were held with the school district in the Northeast to discuss thegrade level bands and the content standards of the project which would constitute the audience.
It was decided the content would focus on the Spring 2020 standards in the hopes of alleviating
the Fall 2020 learning divide, and potentially filling the gaps of instruction from the school
district’s closures due to COVID-19. As parents were tasked with working either at home or inperson in essential positions while their children were at home for the summer, the need tooffer a virtual learning opportunity that was designed so the student would be able to accessand perform the activities without the help of an adult was paramount. There is evidence tosupport the idea that student learning outcomes can be improved through this independent work
(Educational Endorsement Foundation, 2020). Except for the pre-kindergarten students, thedevelopment team decided to proceed with this expectation in mind.
Project team partners determined the use of themes for each grade level module. Each module
would include content that focused on one theme over a two-week period. A total of threethemes for each grade level were decided. Books needed to be selected to be included for readalouds. In the beginning, the content experts planned to use online books through a variety ofcompanies that responded to the pandemic with free resources for teachers; however, due tocopyright issues this was not permissible. In response, it was decided to include content-leadselected read-alouds that were readily available on YouTube. The read-alouds were chosen
based on relationship to the theme, grade level, and were culturally responsive. The books werechosen and shared with the larger partner group. Some books were changed due to lack of rigor
for the grade level and some books were changed to more culturally responsive text. The

152

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

themes were also shared with our partner, WHYY to develop television programming for one
hour each day during the six weeks. The WHYY schedule was distributed with literacy activity
packets at Meal on the Go locations across the city so they could reach students who mightalso be struggling with internet access.
Ideation
Within the ideation stage, the design-based approach focuses on the question “What do I
create?” Although this question adequately addresses a single-based curriculum design for agrade specific user an additional question, “How do I create the learning experience” was added
due to the multiple subject areas and grade levels being addressed in a specific week withvariant web-based interactive approaches. The ideation process unfolded in two iterative andinterrelated phases as the project team design discussions and tool availability emerged.
Initially, the project team discussed hosting all the curriculum on a website. Each page of thewebsite would hold individual Reading Comprehension, Early Literacy, Writing, Math andScience segments for the day and week. This would result in lessons being produced andoperated on each page at each grade level. The lessons would be produced on Google Slides
with embedded video and hyperlinks for the students to navigate.
Instructional designers, however, suggested the use of Articulate 360: Storyline to create thedigital content. This software had advantages, they argued, in creating more interactive content,
and in allowing more compact and user-friendly website architecture. Articulate 360: Storyline
allows for the branching of subjects in one produced lesson instead of having multiple lessons
for each Week, Day and Subject (WDS) activity (see Figure 1). This approach would allow for
greater control of audio, interactive elements, and a more streamlined user experience since theuser would be navigating within one produced lesson in lieu of having six produced lessons on
a page, and therefore the risk of audio playing for two subject lessons while on one webpage
would no longer exist. The use of Articulate 360: Storyline also allowed interactive elements
to be incorporated into each lesson shifting the learning experience from passive to active.
Lastly, the website would broadcast each WDS activity on its own page (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: Sample activities page for grade 2 day

153

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Experimentation
In the experimentation stage, a prototype is built, tested, and feedback is obtained. Ideally, theexperimentation phase lends itself to testing a prototype and refining it based on various
feedback loops. Unfortunately, many programs, including the Ultimate Summer Adventure
program, run on an expedited timeline where a multi-feedback loop prototype is not feasible.
The instructional designers had a one-week window to design the content that would be
released during the first week of the program.
With the timeframe in mind, the designers constructed the prototype so that the user could
engage with various activities for each of the subject areas. One content area for a grade level
may have two or three activities resulting in approximately 40-60 activities for all four levels
for all five subject areas.
Once the prototype was complete, one content expert, one funding partner and one district
administrator tested the learning activities. Notes were taken (see Figure 2) and adjustments
were made by the instructional designers over a two-day period. The prototype was thenlaunched on the website as Week 1’s learning adventure.
The central question of the experimentation stage was “how do I build it?” Through trial anderror and the project team working together, we were able to produce an array of learning
modules that had different interactives suitable for each grade level.

Figure 2: Notes from content expert to instructional designers on weekly build

154

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Implementation
In the implementation stage, the team needed to identify what was and was not working andrevise as needed. After the first week of production, the project team developed a morestreamlined means of submitting the content for design in hopes of streamlining the process
and assisting with identifying missing or repetitive areas of development.
After the first week, the project team met and identified the need for more audio in each lesson
to clearly articulate to the learner how to proceed. For example, for kindergarten students whoare just developing reading skills, all directions and words on the screen were read aloud.
For Pre-K specifically, after the first week, the design team in conjunction with the SMEs
decided to not embed Word documents within their lessons for fear of the user not being able
to access such documents. The designer would move ahead in week two with embedding
Google documents that were viewable by the user.
Evolution
The evolution phase is time to get external feedback. In this project, the feedback came after
week two when the instructional design team was able to report technical user data. In thisphase we assessed the fit of our curriculum model and delivery with the user stakeholders.
The data showed most users were accessing the media through mobile and tablet devices.
Originally, the design was geared toward the Chromebook environment because of the
district’s Chromebook distribution initiative. With this new data, the designers proceeded withmaking both navigational buttons bigger on the slides and increasing the font size.
Additionally, the interactive elements were paired down. For example, an eight-set matchinggame would be decreased to a four or five set matching game to increase the picture and text
sizes.
The SMEs, during weeks five and six, added content data collection by embedding Google
Forms in the interactives. As students answered questions, the responses were recorded
anonymously on a spreadsheet. This process allowed content developers to understand if andhow users were taking part in the activities.
Through the evolution stage, the content and design team made various tweaks to improve theuser experience including:● Written directions for adults/caregivers of PreK students were moved from Google
Docs to a layer within Articulate 360: Storyline so that the adult would not be takenout of the lesson and have difficulty returning to the site. (Week 3)● Written directions for adults/caregivers of PreK students would have audio elements
added to them. (Week 4)● Produced video would be added to Kaltura (an inhouse video platform) and thenembedded into Articulate 360: Storyline. This allowed the Articulate 360: Storyline
file size to remain relatively low.
Discussion
Research Question 1: How Did the Team Create this Online Learning Platform?
After meetings to discuss grade level bands and content areas, decisions were made as to which
content experts were needed. Additional meetings determined the platform to host the content
and which software would make the content interactive. Following those decisions, the content

155

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

experts met with the design team weekly to clarify making content more user friendly andinteractive. Each week the team used an iterative process that served to make changes tocontent and improve functionality for the end user. As discussed earlier, there are other models
of design thinking that could have been applied to this project. The 2009 model from Platter et
al. suggests understanding and observing in the first phase of the cyclical process. This project
did not allow the luxury of complete understanding of the problem, nor the time to observe;
therefore, the Platter model did not meet our needs. Through our iterative process, a new model
was created that details the process used (see Figure 3). In the discover stage, the team createda shared understanding of the challenge, quickly and effectively designing a multi-grade
curriculum to be used asynchronously. The second stage, interpretation, enabled the team todetermine the standards and themes. With set interpretation of the discovered problem, theteam could progress into the third stage, ideation. Here, the team generated multiple ideas andreceived feedback from stakeholders. Stage four, experimentation, took the team throughdeveloping a prototype and getting feedback from students, parents, and team members. The
project learning environment was revised iteratively over the course of six weeks during theimplementation stage as student data became available. The last stage, evolution, would bring
the team back to the interpretation stage each time we received feedback or data to support achange.

Figure 3: Iterative Design Model for Ultimate Summer Learning Adventure
Research Question 2: What Challenges did the Team Face?
The team faced many challenges in the development and implementation of the project. The
timeframe from idea to implementation was a hurdle that had to be addressed. The teamdetermined the serving the needs of the students far outweighed the long days the team would
work to get this project off the ground. Another challenge was finding the content experts forthe curriculum that had the necessary expertise and the time to commit to the project. The one
benefit was the many partners involved in Read by 4th.
An additional challenge was experienced while the platform was in use. Many users were using
cell phones to access the platform. The instructional design team had to adapt the content andsize of items on a page. While internet connectivity did not appear to be an issue when students
were using the platform, not all households in the targeted district had internet access. To
address that challenge, printouts of materials that addressed the same themes were provided atmeal centers across the city.

156

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Research Question 3 How and When was the Curriculum Used?
Analytics from the Google site were studied to identify the most active time periods (see Table
1) and the locations of students where the site was accessed (see Table 2). The site waspromoted at the beginning of the summer through emails, advertising through social media,
local grassroots champions, and radio ads. June through August brought 5,848 unique users
who viewed an average of 3.13 pages per session. In September, the site was renamed, but was
still active and students could continue to use the activities. September through November
brought an additional 434 unique users with less pages per session when compared to summer.
The program was developed for a region in Pennsylvania. The intent was to reach students
from the region. In the summer session, 4,515 of the users were from Pennsylvania, 251 fromNew Jersey, followed by 163 from District of Columbia. Six other states rounded out where
the users were located during the summer. In the Fall, Pennsylvania again hosted the highest
number of users (n=230) followed by New Jersey (n=27) and a surprising number of users allon the same day from Utah (n=230). The analytics suggest a teacher(s) may have discovered
the site and assigned some activities to their students. It is important to note that there was noadvertising for the site after August.
Table 1: Use of ultimate summer learning adventure across time periods
Time period

Users

Sessions

Page Views

Pages per Session

June-Nov (All)
June-Aug(Summer)
Sept-Nov (Fall)

6,190
5,848

6,202
5,848

11,238
10,404

3.10
3.13

434

354

834

2.66

Table 2: Users by location and timeframe
US Locations

June-Aug (Summer)

Sept – Nov (Fall)

June-Nov (All)Pennsylvania
New Jersey
D.C.
Utah
Iowa
Texas
Wyoming
New York
Virginia
California
Washington
Ohio
North Carolina
Delaware
Massachusetts

4,515
251
163
51

230
27
4
23
21
21
13
3

4,677
277
167
74

37
98
81
77

12
12
11
6

58
101
86
89

51
44

Initially, activities were designed based on the assumption that students would use their newly
distributed Google Chromebooks. In the implementation phase, the developers realized157

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

students were mostly using mobile phones which was approximately 77% in the first weeks ofthe summer program. The content experts and developers adapted activities for students toeasily access the content on mobile phones, which was not considered at the beginning ofdevelopment. When the design features were changed to have less words on a page, less choices
on a page, and larger navigational buttons and font sizes, the intent was to provide a better user
experience for the students using mobile devices.
Over the course of the summer programming, 57.96% of users were accessing the content onmobile devices, followed by desktops at 36.88% (See Table 3). It is interesting to note that in
the Fall, after the summer program advertising ended, the content was still available for use;
however, desktops were the device of choice at 80.41%. The team hypothesized that teachers
may be using the curriculum activities in their virtual learning assignments.
Table 3: How users accessed the curriculum
DeviceMobileDesktop
TabletJune-Aug (Summer)
57.96
36.88
5.16

Sept-Nov (Fall)
14.98
80.41
4.61

June-Nov (All)
55.54
39.48
4.98

This project was started and implemented in two weeks. The iterative design-thinking process
occurred throughout the six-week curriculum offering. The team learned valuable insights on
how to create curriculum-based content with asynchronous online activities for the early
grades. The team had to adjust content for grade level by adding additional audio to any writtenmaterial; amount of content on a page and larger response buttons for mobile phone use; andincrease knowledge capacity of technology for the content experts. The instructional designers
and content experts learned from each other and had to work together under high stresscircumstances due to the time constraints.
At the time of the project implementation, many households did not have either the internet
connection or the bandwidth to access the platform. This is an ongoing issue across the country
and is slowly being addressed. Lack of access may have affected the results of this program.
The project team attempted to address this issue by providing physical copies of materials andincluding themed programming through public television (WHYY); however, families that
could have benefitted from the program may not have had the access to participate.
Recommendations
Designing and implementing an asynchronous virtual learning curriculum for preschool
through 2nd grade was a challenging task. Much was learned during the process that can beconsidered as recommendations for others with similar aspirations.
While the goal of this project was to allow students to access the curriculum without a log in,
it is recommended that students would log in to the system. This would allow for better data
tracking and would improve the changes made in real time. It could also provide a way toassess student learning.
Another recommendation concerns accessibility. It may prove best to design activities withmobile devices in mind. When the design is planned for the smallest screen, the material will
be accessible on all devices. As the team learned through this iterative design thinking process,158

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

audio support was a necessity. If words are written, audio needs to be provided to support
universal design for learning. It is also critical in a project like this to have buy- in from all the
stakeholders and to be open to their feedback. Scheduling time and having a process for the
feedback from the beginning would allow for timely iterations. Ultimately, it was feedback
from a variety of stakeholders throughout the process that contributed to the content and designchanges that improved the user experience.
Conclusion
COVID-19 has placed many challenges on schools and student learning. The Ultimate Summer
Learning Adventure was one response to the spring 2020 in person school closures. While it
was initially developed to help students recover or master skills that were presented virtuallyin the spring, this virtual curriculum is still being used by students. The project was a quick
response to a “wicked problem” and was used by the students it was intended to support. One
limitation of this study was the intentional choice of not having students log into the system
did not allow for analysis of student learning. The iterative design process that was instituted
may prove helpful for others intending to support asynchronous, virtual learning for the early
grades.
The development of this project was graciously funded by William Penn Foundation,
Philadelphia School Partnership, Philadelphia Emergency Fund for Stabilization of Early
Education (PEFSEE), and The Philadelphia Foundation.

159

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

References
Alexander, K.L., Entwisle, D. R., Steffel Olson, L. (2007) Lasting consequences of thesummer learning gap. American Sociological Review, 72(2): 167–180.
https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240707200202
Baeck, A., & Gremett, P. (2012). Design thinking. In: H. Degen, & X. Yuan (Eds.), UX bestpractices: How to achieve more impact with user experience (pp. 229–233). McGraw
Hill.
Berry, B. (2020). Teaching, learning, and caring in the post-COVID era. Phi Delta Kappan,
102(1), 14–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721720956840
Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84.
Bubb, S., & Jones, M. A. (2020). Learning from the COVID-19 home-schooling experience:
Listening to pupils, parents/carers and teachers. Improving Schools, 23(3), 209–222.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480220958797
Burns, E. (2020). School librarians online: integrated learning beyond the school walls.
Information and Learning Sciences, 121(7/8), 631–644.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-04-2020-0107
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods
research. SAGE.
DeWitt, P. (2020). Teachers work two hours less per day during COVID-19: 8 key EdWeek
survey findings. Education Week. Retrieved fromhttps://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2020/05/11/teachers-work-an-hour-less-perday.html
Dorn, E., Hancock, B., Sarakatsannis, J., & Viruleg, E. (2020). COVID-19 and student
learning in the United States: The hurt could last a lifetime. McKinsey & Company.
Dorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking' and its application. Design Studies, 32(6),521–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.006
Dunne, D., & Martin, R. (2006). Design thinking and how it will change management
education: An interview and discussion. Academy of Management Learning &Education, 5(4), 512–523. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2006.23473212
Education Endowment Foundation. (2020). Remote learning rapid evidence assessment.
Education Endowment Foundation
Garbe, A., Ogurlu, U., Logan, N., & Cook, P. (2020). Parents’ experiences with remoteeducation during COVID-19 school closures. American Journal of Qualitative
Research, 4(3), 45–65. https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/8471
Gewertz, C. (2020). Bitmoji classrooms: Why teachers are buzzing about them. Education
Week. July 30. https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2020/07/30/bitmoji-classroomswhy-teachers-are-buzzing-about.html
Herold, B., & Yettick, H. (2020, May). This is what teachers want us to now about pandemic
learning. Education Week. Retrieved fromhttps://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2020/05/11/teachers-work-anhour-less-perday.html

160

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Hodges, C. Moore, S. Lockee, B. Trust, T. & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between
emergency remote teaching and online learning. EDUCAUSE Review.
https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remoteteachingand-online-learning.
Khirwadkar, A., Khan, S. I., Mgombelo, J., Obradovic-Ratkovic, S., & Forbes, W. A. (2020).
Reimagining mathematics education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Brock
Education: A Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 29(2), 42–46.
https://doi.org/10.26522/brocked.v29i2.839
Luka, I. (2014). Design thinking in pedagogy. The Journal of Education, Culture, andSociety, 5(2), 63–74. https://doi.org/10.15503/jecs20142.63.74
Muijs, D., Kyriakides, L., Van der Werf, G., Creemers, B., Timperley, H., & Earl, L. (2014).
State of the art–teacher effectiveness and professional learning. School Effectivenessand School Improvement, 25(2), 231–256.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2014.885451
Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Leech, N.L. (2005). On becoming a pragmatic researcher: The
importance of combining quantitative and qualitative research methodologies.
International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(5), 375–387.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570500402447
Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important? Review of
Educational Research, 82(3), 330–348. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457429
Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy
Sciences, 4(2), 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730
Rodgers, L. (2020). Distance learning: Supporting K-12 learners Library Journal, 145(6), 26.
Ross, S. M. (2020). Technology infusion in K-12 classrooms: a retrospective look at three
decades of challenges and advancements in research and practice. Educational
Technology Research and Development, 1–18.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09756-7
Smith, C., & Colton, S. (2020). Creating a YouTube channel to equip parents and teachers ofstudents who are deaf. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 28(2), 453–
461.
Smith, L., & Riley, D. (2012). School leadership in times of crisis. School Leadership &Management, 32(1), 5771. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2011.614941
Stefaniak, J. (2020). The utility of design thinking to promote systematic instructional design
practices in the workplace. Tech Trends, 64: 202210.
doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00453-8
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating
quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. SAGE.
Thakur, A., Soklaridis, S., Crawford, A., Mulsant, B., & Sockalingam, S. (2020). Using rapid
design thinking to overcome COVID-19 challenges in medical education. Academic
Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000003718
von Hippel, P.T., Workman, J., & Downey, D.B. (2018). Inequality in reading and mathskills forms mainly before kindergarten: A replication, and partial correction, of “Areschools the great equalizer?” Sociology of Education, 91(4): 323–357.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040718801760

161

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Welsh, M. A., & Dehler, G. E. (2012) Combining critical reflection and design thinking todevelop integrative learners. Journal of Management Education, 37(6), 771–802.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562912470107
Whittle, C., Tiwari, S., Yan, S., & Williams, J. (2020). Emergency remote teachingenvironment: A conceptual framework for responsive online teaching in crises.
Information and Learning Sciences, 121(5/6), 311–319.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-04-2020-0099
Corresponding author: Lori Severino
Contact email: las492@drexel.edu

162

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Emergency Response in Educational Policies during COVID-19 in Nepal:
A Critical Review
Sagun Shrestha
Dublin City University
Ireland
Laxman Gnawali
Kathmandu University
Nepal

163

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has brought chaos in education across the world, including
developing countries like Nepal. To respond to this educational disruption in this South Asian
country, different educational plans and policies were formulated by the Ministry of Education,
Science and Technology, Government of Nepal. It is not known whether these policies wererealistic and practicable, as there is no review of these documents to date. With this backdrop,
this paper critically reviews the educational plans and policies that were developed to manage
education during the crisis. It appraises the strengths of these policies in terms of their intent
and practicalities of implementation in the given situation, and identifies gaps and challenges,
and recommends some ways to realistically run the education system. The review reveals thatthese documents have several strengths, such as they plan to create data in terms of learners’
access to resources, value self-learning and parent education, and suggest several alternative
ways to resume school. Yet, there are some gaps and challenges, the identification of which
can guide the effective delivery of education in Nepal in any kind of crisis period both at present
and in future. This paper is expected to help policy makers to revisit the existing policies or
guide them when they form future educational policies that are designed to manage educationin any kinds of crisis. It is also deemed helpful for teacher educators, practitioners and othereducational stakeholders to understand about the educational plans and policies formed to deal
with crises.
Keywords: COVID-19, challenges, educational policies, emergency response, strengths

164

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

BackgroundIn the history of education systems, the COVID-19 pandemic has brought the largest disruption
and affected nearly 1.6 billion learners in over 190 countries, and in case of low and lowermiddle income countries, closure of schools and other learning spaces have affected up to 99
percent of learners (United Nations, 2020). The out-of-school rate of primary education is high(up to 86 percent) in low human development index countries whereas it is low in very highhuman development countries (only 20 percent) (Conceição et al., 2020). The current situation
has the potential to further widen the gap between children of low and high development
countries. The learning space has become disembodied, and virtual not actual, for students ofdeveloping countries, affecting both student learning and organization of schools during the
pandemic (Pacheco, 2020).
In the case of Nepal, until December 11 2020, 245,650 positive cases of Coronavirus werereported with 1,663 cases of COVID-related deaths (Worldometer, 2020). As the early
response to this crisis, the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MoEST), theGovernment of Nepal (GoN) issued a brief notice on March 3 2020 to conduct all the year-end
examinations within March, which is the end of the academic year. Later, on 24 March, the
GoN announced lockdown as the second COVID case was identified in Nepal (Center for
Education and Human Resource Development [CEHRD], 2020a). At first, all the educational
institutions were closed till April 27 2020, but the lockdown had to be extended further. The
baby step of distance learning got a boost during COVID-19 in Nepal (Karki, 2020) although
the quality of technological devices that learners use to access education is one of the concerns
in developing nations such as Nepal (Shrestha, 2016). COVID-19 revealed major inequalities
such as access to devices, platforms and places to do schoolwork for the learners when they
are outside schools (Fullan, 2020), and it was also very visible in this small South Asian
country.
Giri and Dawadi (2020) report that around 9 million school children have been affected in
Nepal by the school closure due to the COVID-19 crisis. Amongst those affected, the children
having internet access is 1,093,394, children with access to other media are 3,958,270, children
with no access to other media are 2,357,959 and the children at risk are 995,090 (CEHRD,
2020a). There can be a higher risk of dropout of nearly 3,335,000 children in Nepal who do
not have access to any media needed to support virtual learning. To respond to the current
disruption in education, particularly in school education brought by the COVID-19 pandemic,
the GoN developed and implemented some policies over a period. It is not known whether
these policies stood as strong documents to guide the practices during the pandemic. Of late,there has not been any critical review of the plans and policies that were formulated to respondto the educational chaos during the pandemic in Nepal. With an aim to fill this gap, this study
critically reviews all the plans and policies that came as responses to manage education during
the pandemic.
Policy Review: Theoretical Bases
Policies do not fail or succeed on their own right rather their progress depends on how they are
implemented (Hudson et al., 2019). Neupane (2020) proposes a five-step framework forformulating and implementing effective education policy. The first and second steps include
examining socio-cultural disparity, and the third focuses on the analysis of educational inputs.
Neupane (2020) contends that it is necessary to map available resources for education spending
to learn both resource gaps and demand/supply gaps. She argues that a number of concerns

165Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

should be addressed, such as identifying the timeline, necessary institutional framework andfurther programs to achieve the policy objectives and goals (step 4). The final step is assessing
socio-economic developmental impacts of education. Although this framework seems
comprehensive, it has missed out the socio-economic aspect to be examined at the first stepwhich can substantially help policy makers to develop effective policies.
On the basis of the success factors they found in their study, Norris et al. (2014) provide
suggestions to make policy effective for implementation, such as identifying the problem andthe outcomes that matter most, thinking about implementation while developing the policy,
being aware of and ready to respond to the wider system, staying close to the implementers,
determining where and how decisions are made, building in long-term focus, and being
prepared to rethink if the context changes dramatically. Highlighting the contributors to policy
failures, Hudson et al. (2019) identify overly optimistic expectations, implementation indispersed governance, inadequate collaborative policy making, and vagaries of the political
cycle (focus on the short-term results) are four contributors. Long-term policies can bechallenging for the government because the political will necessary to drive long-term policy
making dissolves over time (Ilott et al., 2016). Hudson and their colleagues argue that theimplementation difficulties of any policy are also related to the lack of collaboration in policymaking and the failure to create a common place for public problem solving. Policies
formulated at the central level may face difficulties of ensuring consistency in delivery at local
level (Hudson et al., 2019). In some cases, policies are formulated with many key elements left
unexplained which can lead people to spend substantial time and effort as ambiguous terms
need to be explained and interpreted (Weaver, 2020). Norris et al. (2014) argue that the clarity
on the issue that is dealt on the policy also helps decision makers to choose during
implementation particularly about where resources should be focused. The above discussion
reveals that many policy analysts have proposed different models and guidelines to analyse
policy formation and implementation, which will guide the analysis of the findings of thisstudy.
Methodology
This is a policy review focused on intents and practicalities of the plans and policies formedby the GoN during the COVID-19 pandemic. Guided by the document analysis method, firstly,
the authors went through all major policy documents that were released during the pandemic
till December 2020 namely Emergency Action Plan for School Education, 2020, Student
Learning Facilitation Guideline, 2020 and Framework for School Operation, 2020. These
documents were retrieved from the sites of MoEST and Center for Education and Human
Resource Development (CEHRD), Nepal. Bowen (2009) says that document analysis is theprocess of “evaluating documents in such a way that empirical knowledge is produced andunderstanding is developed” (p. 34). The researchers of this study intended to produce theempirical knowledge based on these documents which can help researchers and educational
stakeholders understand the essence of these policies. During the exploration, the focus of theauthors was more on witting evidence (O’Leary, 2017), which is the content within the
document, compared to the focus on latent contents of the documents such as author or creator,
tone, agenda, style of the documents (O’Leary, 2017). To do so, the technique the researchers
used during exploration is closer to the “interview technique” claimed by O’ Leary (2017) as
the authors highlighted the texts bearing some tentative questions in mind. Then, theresearchers organized the information into the central questions related to intent andpracticalities (Bowen, 2009). Later, they re-read those notes and arranged them under strengths,
and gaps and challenges. They also went through some other documents and notices released

166Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

and issued during the pandemic by the GoN and other local bodies. O’Leary (2017) contends
that how we read and what we draw from the documents will be based on our own situatedness.
However, the researchers during the analysis of these documents tried to be as objective as
possible in order for the document analysis outcomes to be credible and valid. The followingshows the process of our review and analysis of the documents under discussion.

Figure 1: The research process
The following research questions guided the study:
1. What are strengths of the educational policies that were/are implemented during
COVID-19 in Nepal?
2. What are the gaps and challenges found in those educational policies?
3. What aspects of educational policies need to be considered to make such policies
operational during any crisis contexts in a developing nation, such as Nepal?
In the following sections, the authors discuss the documents chronologically identifying theirstrengths, and gaps and challenges.
Findings and Discussion
Emergency Action Plan for School Education, 2020
The first plan brought by the government during the pandemic in Nepal is the Emergency
Action Plan for School Education, 2020 (Government of Nepal, Ministry of Education, Science& Technology [GoN, MoEST], 2020a). It is a comprehensive plan that claims to list activities
to manage the school education during the crisis, processes to complete the activities, timelines
to carry them out and the implementers as well as supporters who will play a significant rolein carrying out these tasks. One of the strengths is that it has a plan to create a record of students
under five categories for the alternative learning considering learners’ access to resources underfive different categories: students having no access to any resources; students having access toradio/FM; students having access to television; students having access to computers but noaccess to Internet connection; and students having access to all kinds of resources. This wastargeted to be completed by the first week of October 2020. It also planned to ascertain the
distribution of textbooks to the students. Other components worth noting were students’
enrolment plans, intent to send teachers to teach at the school sites, the classification of content

167

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

as self-learning or teacher supported, the development of self-learning materials in line withthe curriculum, the implementation of home schooling, the development of temporary learningfacilitation centres and converting them into free Wi-Fi zones and to evaluate the learners basedon their context. Another crucial scheme of this action plan is to develop and disseminate somematerials to deal with mental wellbeing of teachers and learners, which is hardly taken into
account in Nepal (Gnawali, 2020) although the study of Mahat and Khanal (2012) report thatchild mental health program implemented in schools have significant positive impact on
students, school environment and teaching learning activities. The study of Gautam et al.
(2020) on the self-reported psychological distress during COVID-19 in Nepal equallyemphasizes that there is a need of the formal body to address the appropriate mental health andpsychological support response in Nepal.
Despite being an action plan, it seems that in many cases, it lacked explanation of theimplementation steps on how to carry out the activities it listed. For instance, it planned tocollect data in relation to the access to resources by the first week of October; nonetheless, it
has remained silent on how the data will be collected. The question emerges whether it waspossible to collect the data in the given timeline given the situation that there was no usual
practice of data collection, and there is high prevalence of psychological distress among the
Nepalese during the pandemic (Gautam et al., 2020). Norris et al. (2014) contend that the clarity
on the issue is needed on any policy for the effective implementation.
The document is very ambitious in that it plans to develop the scheme to expand internet accessto the schools beginning from October or November. This plan seems very relevant but
unrealistic as this is a mere statement without a proper study and clearly stated action plans. It
corroborates the argument of Hudson et al., (2019) that overly optimistic expectation in any
policies lead to failure in the implementation. First, there needs to be a categorical specificationsuch as, which schools from which regions should be targeted, what could be the minimum
bandwidth for each school and in what ways the schools use the newly obtained Internet for
facilitating teaching and learning? The breakdown of broad actions is missing in this document.
Some plans in this policy document seem completely unrealistic such as, making mobile data
free while operating the learning portal of CEHRD during COVID-19. Radhakrishnan-Nair etal. (2020) argue “This will require that new servers and network hardware be set up in many
provinces to handle higher traffic” (p. 21) and these actions did not seem feasible during thecrisis. Nepal Economic Forum (2020) claims that the GoN has failed to build the necessary
infrastructure for virtual learning during COVID-19 period.
Nonetheless, the document paved the way to design a more comprehensive action plan titledStudent Learning Facilitation Guideline, 2020, analysed in the next section, which helped tofacilitate learning during the pandemic.
Student Learning Facilitation Guideline, 2020
This is a primary guideline aimed at helping learners at the school level in Nepal to gain thelearning objectives set by the Curriculum Development Centre for the current academic year
during the time of the COVID-19 crisis (GoN, MoEST, 2020b). This guideline mandated to be
implemented by the MoEST in 2020 has defined students as children who are learning formallyor informally and are of school-going age groups but have not joined schools. The guidelineclassifies school students of Nepal into 5 categories (listed in the previous section) as stated in
the Emergency Action Plan for School Education, 2020. This guideline has clearly made abroader category of learners and recommended some plans to address diversified learners in

168

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

the current crisis. Yet, there are some gaps and challenges to implementing it, the identificationof which can guide the effective delivery of education in general and in the current crisis andduring any kind of crisis period in future. Since this is the primary guideline supposed toaddress multiple educational issues during the pandemic in Nepal, the authors have given more
space in this article to the discussion of this plan. In the next sections, they discuss the strengths
and gaps with relevant evidences from the document.
Strengths. This guideline has specified the roles of different stakeholders such as CEHRD,
Curriculum Development Centre (CDC), municipalities and rural municipalities, schools andparents to facilitate the learning during the period of the COVID-19 crisis. This is a necessary
step on policy formation as Neupane (2020) asserts that it is required to understand theavailability of resources and plan accordingly. This guideline also plans to collect data oflearners in general and in relation to the access to learning resources in particular which canbenefit to devise new educational plans and policies in future.

Figure 2: Excerpt from the Student Learning Facilitation Guideline, 2020 (p. 2)
Clause 5 of the Guideline above requires the schools to collect/maintain data of students
submitted at a local level. This holds schools responsible for the data and the local bodies tomanage them further which ultimately increases the coordination between the local bodies andthe schools.
It also stresses that there should be a separate learning facilitation for the differently-abledchildren. This consideration to include them in learning during the crisis is positive from an
inclusivity perspective. Human Rights Nepal (n.d.) argues that many children with disabilities
do not get appropriate kind of support to learn and do well in schools in Nepal as a result, they
are deprived of quality education.

169

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Another positive aspect of this guideline is to require a head teacher to enter the data of students
into the Integrated Educational Management Information System (IEMIS), even though theavailability of a functionally effective system in all community schools is still questionable.
This provision not only ensures that the data are entered in the system for action and analysis,but it also impacts in the long run the capacity building of the schools which is consistent withthe argument of Norris and their colleagues (2014) who contend that one of the factors ofeffective policy is its focus on long run.
Group management of the learners for the facilitation of learning is an appropriate plan, andinvolving parents in the teaching-learning process is another good move in this guideline.
Parental involvement was also briefly stated in the previous Emergency Action Plan for School
Education, 2020. This provision helps in supporting students as per their learning needs. In thepast, the Government was rigid with regard to the education regulations, but now it has shown
flexibility in different ways as it has valued home schooling, online learning and promoted
self-learning. Besides the dormant role of parents, this guideline has also delineated some of
their roles for the day-to-day learning.
In previous years, despite availability of some digital resources, there were teachers who would
not access those materials to use them in regular teaching and learning (Rana et al., 2018);
nonetheless, at this time, a large number of teachers are trying to access digital materials toengage learners in this crisis context. In this regard, this guideline has also stated that teachers
can access materials from the different sources such as www.learning.cehrd.edu.np,
www.youtube.com/ncedvirtual, www.moecdc.gov.np, www.doe.gov.np.
Furthermore, this guideline has given some room for the adjustment of courses rather thancompletion, which is a departure from the former practices based on a rigid structure (Acharya,2016) that focus on completing the courses in each academic year without focusing on students’learning. Now, the teachers will be able to adjust the contents based upon the needs andpracticalities, and also critically think about what works and what may not in the crisis period.
Gaps and challenges. Despite having some strengths, this guideline has some gaps andchallenges that may compromise the effectiveness of its implementation as intended. The
guideline has stated that in the current academic year, in order to classify the students indifferent groupwise categories, the schools should keep the records of their names, parents’names, addresses, contact details, their groupwise categories and their access to resources, andsubmit them to the local level. The question emerges here: how can all schools keep records at
this time, as there is no school physically running (Shrestha, 2020) and not all schools havebeen able to reach out to all the children (United Nations Children’s Fund [UNICEF] Nepal,
2020)? The guideline also states that the schools can use the data collected in the previous year
and provide details. Again, the question is if the schools have collected data in relation to theiraccess to technology in the previous years as there was no consideration of such issues earlier.
This confusion and complexity might lead the local level not to take the job seriously, whichaccords with the argument of Hudson et al. (2019), that is to classify the students as there is noclear action plan delineated by this guideline.
The digital divide, which was already considered as a challenge by the National Education
Policy 2019 (GoN, MoEST, 2019), seems to continue defeating the purpose of this guidelinethat it may further augment the digital divide in the long run. A mere division of learners is not
sufficient. The following sub-clause seems to have totally favoured the learners having accessto all kinds of resources.

170

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Figure 3: Excerpt from the Student Learning Facilitation Guideline, 2020 (p. 7)
The issue that persists here is the equitable provision to other groups of learners who haveaccess to limited or almost no resources, and the guideline seems to have remained silent on it.
Under clause 19, it also states that as per necessity, resources will be made available byproducing them in local languages which seems to be a good move as it has also considered
the use of local languages to develop resources which can help learners to have a better
understanding of concepts that are dealt in their languages. However, there remains a
procedural confusion. Since the guideline has not delineated procedural aspects, the merestatement seems a kind of comfort word for the policy activists who might advocate use of
local languages in teaching-learning resources.
The plan to require a head teacher of the school to enter the data of students into the IEMIS isa good idea. Nevertheless, there are layers of confusions to be unpacked, which can leadstakeholders to spend substantial time and effort to clarify confusions (Weaver, 2020). Is sucha system effectively functioning in all schools? If not, what steps can be taken to build such asystem?
This guideline mentions that there will be some actions towards arranging the required budget
to create and manage a unified education portal, establishing and managing educational
television channels, developing electronic resources, technology and devices, arranging
alternative means to power, and creating virtual lab, E-cloud lab and E-library. Norris et al.
(2014) claim that obtaining clarity on any concerns that are stated in any policy is one of theimportant steps to make it effective; however, in this guideline, it is not clear what percentage
of budget will be there and who the contributors are.

171

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Figure 4: Excerpt from the Student Learning Facilitation Guideline, 2020 (p. 10)
It has also stated that teachers can access materials from the different sources such as
www.learning.cehrid.edu.np, www.youtube.com/ncedvirtual, www.moecdc.gove.np andwww.doe.gov.np. The issue is if there was any form of teachers’ engagement when theselearning portals are created and updated, or if there is any plan to engage teachers. If it is purely
top-down production, the materials available in these resources can be only in a form repository
as teachers may not use them, having found that most of the materials available there are notcontext-appropriate. The Clause 8 sub-clause 5 claims,

Figure 5: Excerpt from the Student Learning Facilitation Guideline, 2020 (p. 8)
It is a good policy to upload some materials created and used by local levels and schools to theschool’s site or the site created at the local level. Nonetheless, by just uploading the resources

172

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

at local level limits the teachers’ contribution in creating the resources which can have apotential to contribute nationally. It also shows that local teachers’ contributions are not valued,
and there seems to be very much expert-centric practice bypassing the roles of local teachers
who indeed have the ability to design context-appropriate materials. Shrestha (in press) argues
that the digital materials developed by the teachers will be context-sensitive and can be
included in a centrally created digital repository.
As schools remained closed for a long period, and the “emergency remote teaching” (Hodges
et al., 2020) could not be as effective as face-to-face and also the positive cases of COVID-19
were dropping continuously, in November, MoEST planned to reopen the schools. They
brought out the new Framework for School Operation, 2020 which is discussed in the coming
section.
Framework for School Operation, 2020
The recent Framework for School Operation, 2020 (GoN, MoEST, 2020c) in the context of
COVID-19 implemented by the MoEST has clearly delineated the preparation strategies thatthe institutions should adopt before reopening the schools such as disinfecting the schools thatwere used for quarantine, arranging help-desks, consulting with local authorities that include
parents, the members of children’s clubs about the possibility of reopening schools and so on.
The strength of this framework is that it has also created a checklist to measure if the schools
are safe to open. Interestingly, it has nowhere mentioned the protocol of transportation used
for the students who commute to and from their schools. Especially, a number of private
schools that have a large number of commuters will be struggling to resume their schools as
there is no clear policy about students’ transportation in this framework. Worse, the students
who use public transports can be exposed to vehicles, that may not follow the safety protocols
for transportation (Ojha, 2020). It reveals that the collaboration with local stakeholders is
missing while framing the policy, which can potentially lead to the policy failure (Hudson etal., 2019).
This framework provides the authority to the local bodies that comprise parents, schools,
children’s clubs and municipalities or rural municipalities which can decide the reopening of
the schools depending upon the local context. It is in line with the assertion of Norris et al.
(2014) that other stakeholders have to be brought into policymaking to make it effective. This
framework firmly maintains that based on the risk of COVID-19 expansion, available physicalresources and students’ number in a school, the local bodies will help implement one of thefollowing alternatives: running all the classes at once; running classes in different shifts;
running classes reducing the actual time; running classes on alternate days; and running classes
by dividing the students of the same class. These alternatives have helped local bodies toconsider the options to resume schools in their regions.
This framework also states the role of a school management committee to help children be
psychologically prepared to join the school. It equally argues that the local bodies will liaise
with the organizations working for students with disabilities and the parents to create afavourable situation for the return of students with disabilities or additional needs; however,the policy has not clearly stated how local bodies will achieve it and where they get resources
required to complete these tasks. Once the local bodies access the data about students withdisabilities or additional needs, how can they provide learners with resources to help themcontinue learning? Will liaison alone with the organizations working for students withdisabilities or additional needs and parents suffice to solve this issue? These issues are notclearly addressed in the framework.

173

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Figure 6: Excerpt from the Framework for School Operation, 2020 (p. 15)
The above is a very broad statement from the framework that talks about the identification anduse of local resources to run schools. The way the local resources are identified and managed
by local bodies is not explicitly addressed. Norris et al. (2014) assert that clarity on a policy
helps decision makers find out where resources should be targeted. It can be a case that the
local bodies may keep on waiting for the clear direction and decisions of the federal orprovincial bodies which is usually a practice in Nepal.
Based on the emergency educational policies implemented during this crisis, there were somenew developments to deal with crises such as creation of a Learning Portal(https://learning.cehrd.edu.np/) by CEHRD, actions to provide free data for the students fromdisadvantaged communities, circulation of Procedures for Communication Networking in
Schools (CEHRD, 2020b) to establish a closer user group and so on. Some of these new
initiatives also had some issues which are briefly discussed below.
Issues on Initiatives Driven by Educational Policies During the Emergency
The first ever learning portal was developed by CEHRD during the pandemic, which isbelieved to have helped a large majority of the students and teachers. It comprises the lessons
intended as self-learning materials for students of different levels. If utilized as intended, thematerials appeared to be effective for maintaining the learning of the children during the
emergency period. The authors question the sensitivity of the selection and use of a picture(Figure 7) which appears on the homepage of the learning portal. It is, of course, hard tounderstand the rationale behind using this picture on the homepage of the learning portal.
Questions may arise such as, is the use of the picture on the homepage to show how curious alittle girl is for learning which potentially can motivate other learners as well? Or is it to convey
the visitors of this site the message that despite being from a low socioeconomic background,
this girl is still interested in learning?

Figure 7: The landing page of the Learning Portal that includes a little girl’s image

174

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

The girl in the picture seems to be from a state-owned school and from low socio-economic
background as in general underprivileged students go to state-owned schools in Nepal(Mathema, 2007). Buckingham et al. (2013) argue that children from low socioeconomic
backgrounds begin their schools with low literacy, and it is likely that they can be weak inreading when they progress through school too. So, it can be assumed that using a picture that
portrays a particular socio-economic status might make such a group feel that the content usedin this portal are equally suitable for them. However, a learning portal is not a report to have a
picture used to depict a particular group of school children because politicisation of the page,
if it is done taking account of socio-economic status, can remain an issue. Undoubtedly, in thisage of ICT, the meaning of any artifact can be conveyed using multiple modes, for example,
using texts, pictures, videos and other semiotic resources. In this case, if the picture used in the
portal cannot help visitors to construct a meaning, CEHRD may need to reconsider this. In
addition, the issue here is also of the acknowledgement to this little girl whose picture is usedin this portal, for instance, who is this girl and what is the meaning of using her picture here?
This brief information could have been mentioned as a note on the site.
It is obvious that during a crisis or an emergency, there is a very limited time to respond to any
issues (Herman, 1969). In many cases, the attempts made to respond to an emergency seem
random which, of course, calls for proper care and attention. For example, while uploading thenotices related to the schedule of airing or telecasting of educational audio and video materials
on the site of the CEHRD, the notices had some missing information regarding dates due topoor scanning. In the notice below (Figure 8) issued by CEHRD, the extreme left-hand column(circled in green) which mentions the dates and days of telecasting audio-visual materials isblurry. Educational television and radio broadcasts are important communication means
between educators and students when managing internet connectivity is challenging (David etal., 2020).

Figure 8: Unclear notice uploaded in the site of CEHRD

175

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

To help learners to join online learning, CEHRD circulated Procedures for Communication
Networking in Schools on December 18, 2020. This document aims to create a closer usergroup in schools by setting up communication networking between students and teachers. As
per this document, a closer user group is a systemic online networking between students,
teachers, parents and school officials created for learning facilitation. It states that the available
services related to such groups will be cut off completely or partially once the schools run
physically. This provision seems impressionistic as it was approved by MoEST on December
01 and circulated by CEHRD 18 days later when many schools resumed physically. The
Framework for School Operation, 2020 which has guided to resume schools physically, wasapproved on November 05, nearly a month before the Procedures was circulated. Actually, theProcedures should have been implemented much earlier to assist the learners engage in online
learning by setting up a closer user group. Although the document seems comprehensive, its
arrival at this point of time seems the relevant effort made at an irrelevant period.
Lastly, although the issue the authors are pointing out below is not the initiative based on
educational policies developed during emergency, it has a direct implication on the formulationof emergency plans and actions. It is unfortunate to note that the MoEST still has not published,
let alone updated, the reports and figures related to education on its website even though they
have created a separate tab for it. For example, when a visitor visits the site of the MoEST,
particularly the pages titled “national education in figures, reports and curriculum”, thefollowing message pops up:

Figure 9: Screenshot of the website of MoEST, GoN
It is high time that the authorities like ministries updated information on their sites which will
be useful to manage emergency situations and develop any educational plan in future.
d’Orville (2020) argues that the disruption brought by this pandemic “offers the opportunity
for all actors in the education sector to rethink the system and discuss how to educate future
generations” (p. 13). All the educational policies developed to respond to the current pandemic
are first of their kind. These policies aimed at addressing the pandemic did acknowledge some176

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

novel aspects of education. These policies have also signalled a transformation in educationsuch as valuing self-learning, redefining traditional assessment, focusing on a parental role ineducation, the last of which was highly neglected in the past, and looking for broader
collaboration with all possible educational stakeholders. However, in many cases, it seems thatthese educational policies are still one-way and have a top-down orientation. They lackdialogues with local stakeholders of education, and they seem to have been prepared without
enough homework and consultation with stakeholders, such as teachers, parents, school heads,
learners and also community members. Although the pandemic times were unusual, enoughlocal consultation could have been possible as teachers, school managers, parents, local
community members and learners could be available virtually. As a result, the emergency
response could have been much more solid. It is observed that many students are left behindduring this crisis (Dawadi et al., 2020), and the gap between private and public schools inmanaging education during this crisis widened largely (Pandey, 2020).
Recommendations
Based on the researchers’ observation as teacher educators and the analysis of the above
educational policies, some recommendations are made. First, educational policies need to bedialogic and bi-directional thereby getting enough inputs from local educational stakeholders
so that the implementers of these policies can ensure that they fit to the local context.
Second, the collection of data about students that includes access to resources is a must during
their enrolment, and it has to be frequently updated. This can be done by developing a specificform that students can fill it up if they can write on their own or parents can do so on behalf ofyounger students.
Third, the Student Learning Facilitation Guideline is silent on promoting learners from noaccess category to the category having some and further to the category having full access toresources. There should be plans to promote current learners from the level, that is learners
having access to no resources to the other level and so on. Fourth, to require the headteachers
to enter the data of students into the IEMIS, there should be a clear guideline to develop sucha system at a local level or in the school, and equally, there should be the plan to mentor theheadteachers to enable them to work on any digital platforms.
Fifth, it is a good initiative of the student learning facilitation guideline to give some flexibility
to teachers to adjust curriculum in the current setting rather than completing courses. In any
future policy, there should be a provision which ensures that teachers gain the autonomy todecide course content so that the learning objectives indicated by the curriculum are met in a
comfortable and realistic manner instead of merely completing the course for the sake ofcompletion.
Sixth, the guideline has not mentioned anything about adding resources generated by teachers
if they are found useful. Adding resources built by teachers to a portal also means valuingteachers’ expertise which can help build resources that can be more contextual. Therefore,
future plans and policies should consider teachers’ expertise and recognize them nationally.
Seventh, as the guideline mentions, parent education which can help them to instigate to
involve their children in learning, the nature and role of parent education should be clearlystated. Also, there should be a study that explores if any parent education is practised ordesigned to practise at any level.

177Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Eighth, in the guideline, there is no timeline to execute the specific action plans, and it has very
limited actions. As a result, it might fail to direct the stakeholders to carry out their roles
effectively within the relevant period of time. Therefore, either this guideline needs to clearly
describe the timeline or the upcoming policies should indicate the timelines for each actionplan.
Lastly, the data such as Education in Figures and other relevant educational reports should bemade available in the MoEST or CEHRD sites, and they should be timely updated. In addition,
when the key information is disseminated through the official sites, they have to be reviewed
for clarity both in content and presentation.
Conclusion
The implementation of all the educational policies to manage education in a crisis situation isindeed a praiseworthy move of the CEHRD and MoEST, the Government of Nepal. The policy
documents the authors reviewed are novel in many cases and present landmark plans. They
validate self-learning and online learning and emphasize collection of data of learners in
relation to their access to resources to assist teaching and learning. They also accentuate parent
education to bring parents into a teaching and learning process. Despite having these strengths,
these policies which seem to have been formulated with little examination of the situation andwithout clear directions for implementing the actions also have some issues. One of the major
educational policies, the Guideline exhibits overly optimistic intents coupled with ambiguity.
Further, the procedural aspects to accomplish certain tasks or action plans are missing mosttimes. There are gaps on how the stipulated activities can be executed in terms of budget andother arrangements.
Based on the critical observation on the policies in relation to the current crisis situation, theauthors recommend some steps that policymakers can adopt while forming a new policy orrevisiting any existing policy related to education. In the meantime, it is also expected that thispaper also informs other stakeholders understand and explore the current Nepalese education
system. This paper is purely a document analysis, and it does not include the perceptions andexperiences of stakeholders on the implementation. Therefore, a further exploration on how
educational stakeholders interact with these policies can yield equally interesting insights.

178

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

References
Acharya, K. P. (2016). Fostering critical thinking practices at primary science classrooms in
Nepal. Research in Pedagogy, 6(2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.17810/2015.30
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative
Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
Buckingham, J., Wheldall, K., & Beaman-Wheldall, R. (2013). Why poor children are more
likely to become poor readers: The school years. Australian Journal of Education, 57,
190–213. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944113495500
Center for Education and Human Resource Development [CEHRD]. (2020a). COVID-19
education cluster contingency plan, 2020.
https://www.doe.gov.np/assets/uploads/files/54ba4942574885a514869a72a6b456cd.pdf
CEHRD. (2020b). Procedures for communication networking in schools, 2020.
https://cehrd.gov.np/file_data/mediacenter_files/media_file-1-1136122789.pdf
Conceição, P., Hall, J., Jahic, A., Kovacevic, M., Nayyar, S., Ortubia, A., Pavez, F., Rivera,
C., & Tapia, H., (2020). Human development perspectives, COVID-19 and humandevelopment: Assessing the crisis, envisioning the recovery. UNDP.
http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/COVID-19_and_human_development_0.pdf
David, R., Pellini, A., Jordan, K., & Phillips, T. (2020). Education during the COVID-19
crisis: Opportunities and constraints of using EdTech in low-income countries.
EdTech Hub and Digital Pathways at Oxford, Blavatnik School of Government.
https://www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2020-04/Education-during-COVID-19crisis.pdf
Dawadi, S., Giri, R., & Simkhada, P. (2020). Impact of COVID-19 on the education sector in
Nepal – challenges and coping strategies. Sage Submissions.
https://doi.org/10.31124/advance.12344336.v1
d’Orville, H. (2020). COVID-19 causes unprecedented educational disruption: Is there a roadtowards a new normal? Prospects 49, 11–15.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09475-0
Fullan, M. (2020). Learning and the pandemic: What’s next? Prospects, 49, 25–28.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09502-0
Gautam, K., Adhikari, R. P., Gupta, A. S., Shrestha, R. K., Koirala, P., & Koirala, S. (2020).
Self-reported psychological distress during the COVID-19 outbreak in Nepal:
findings from an online survey. BMC psychology, 8(1), 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-020-00497-z
Giri, R., & Dawadi, S. (2020, August 27). Nepal’s response to school closures: Mapping
equity and inclusion. UKFIET: The Educational and Development Forum.
https://www.ukfiet.org/2020/nepals-response-to-school-closures-mapping-equity-andinclusion/
Gnawali, L. (2020). From personal to political: Establishing the agenda of teacher well-being.
In L. Ruas (Ed.), Creating Global Change (pp.104–107). IATEFL Global issues SIG.
https://gisig.iatefl.org/wpcontent/publications/CREATING%20GLOBAL%20CHANGE%20-%20GISIG.pdf

179

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Government of Nepal, Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [GoN, MoEST].
(2019). National education policy, 2019.
https://moe.gov.np/assets/uploads/files/Education_Policy.pdf
GoN, MoEST. (2020a). Emergency action plan for school education, 2020.
https://moe.gov.np/article/1373/schoolopeni.html
GoN, MoEST. (2020b). Student learning facilitation guideline, 2020.
https://moe.gov.np/article/1364/alternativeeducationguideline.html
GoN, MoEST. (2020c). Framework for school operation, 2020.
https://moe.gov.np/article/1364/alternativeeducationguideline.html
Herman C. F. (1969). Crisis in foreign policy. A simulation analysis. Bobbs-Merrill.
Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020, March 27). The difference
between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review.
https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remoteteaching-and-online-learning
Hudson, H., Hunter, D. & Peckham, S. (2019). Policy failure and the policy-implementation
gap: can policy support programs help?, Policy Design and Practice, 2(1), 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2018.1540378
Human Rights Nepal (n.d.). Education for Children with Disabilities in Nepal.
https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/accessible_document/nepal_etr_english_final.
pdf
Ilott, O., Randall, J., Bleasdale, A. & Norris, E. ( 2016). Making Policy Stick: Tackling LongTerm Challenges in Government. Institute for Government.
Karki, S. (2020, May 8). Lockdown gives distance learning a boost in Nepal. Nepali Times.
https://www.nepalitimes.com/banner/lockdown-gives-distance-learning-a-boost-innep
Mahat, P. & Khanal, M. B. (2010). Report of Impact Study of CMHP – School Interventions.
CMC-Nepal. https://www.cmcnepal.org.np/publication/report-of-impact-study-ofcmhp-school-interventions-by-dr-pashupati-mahat-mr-madhu-bilash-khanal-2012june-2012/
Mathema K. B. (2007). Crisis in Education and Future Challenges for Nepal. European
Bulletin of Himalayan Research, 31, 46–66.
https://www.academia.edu/35966628/Crisis_in_Education_and_Future_Challenges_f
or_Nepal_Kedar_Bhakta_Mathema
Nepal Economic Forum. (2020). Education. nefport: Digital Transformation Brought about
by COVID-19 Globally. 43, 26–27.
https://issuu.com/nepaleconomicforum/docs/nefport_43_-final__january_5_
Neupane, P. (2020). Policy Framework for Education Development in Nepal. International
Education Studies, 13(1), 89–97.
https://issuu.com/nepaleconomicforum/docs/nefport_43_-final__january_5
Norris, E., & McCrae, J. ( 2013). Policy that Sticks: Preparing to govern for lasting change.
Institute for Government.
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/Policy%20t
hat%20sticks%20final_0.pdf

180Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Ojha, K. (2020, September 17). Long-haul transportation resumes, but people wishing totravel during Dashain are unsure about safety protocols. The Kathmandu Post.
https://kathmandupost.com/national/2020/09/17/long-haul-transportation-resumesbut-people-wishing-to-travel-during-dashain-are-unsure-about-safety-protocols
O’Leary, Z. (2017). The essential guide to doing your research project (3rd ed.). Sage.
Pacheco, J. A. (2020). The “new normal” in education. Prospects.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09521-x
Pandey, L. (2020 August 18). Nepal: Students fear loss of academic year due to COVID-19.
DW: Made for Minds. https://www.dw.com/en/nepal-students-fear-loss-of-academicyear-due-to-COVID-19/a-54609190
Radhakrishnan-Nair, K., Aedo, C., Aryal, M.P., Sherpa, M., & Sharma, M. (2020, June 17).
Nepal steps up remote learning during COVID-19. World Bank Blogs.
https://blogs.worldbank.org/endpovertyinsouthasia/nepal-steps-remote-learningduring-COVID-19
Rana, K., Greenwood, J., & Fox‐Turnbull, W. (2020). Implementation of Nepal’s education
policy in ICT: Examining current practice through an ecological model. The
Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 86(2), e12118.
Shrestha, S. (2016). Exploring mobile learning opportunities and challenges in Nepal: The
potential of open-source platforms. [unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University ofWest London.
Shrestha, S. (2020, April 19). Nepal’s private colleges running online, public ones shut. The
Annapurna Express. https://theannapurnaexpress.com/news/nepals-private-collegesrunning-online-public-ones-shut-2418
Shrestha, S. (forthcoming) Integrating information and communication technologies (ICT) in
education in Nepal. In D. B. Subedi (Ed.) Ideas and inputs from Irish academia forthe development of Nepal.
United Nations Children’s Fund [UNICEF] Nepal. (2020, August 28). COVID-19: At least athird of the world’s and two-thirds of Nepal’s schoolchildren unable to access remotelearning during school closures, new UNICEF report says.
https://www.unicef.org/nepal/press-releases/COVID-19-least-third-worlds-and-twothirds-nepals-schoolchildren-unable-access
United Nations. (2020). Policy brief: Education during COVID-19 and beyond.
https://www.un.org/development/desa/dspd/wpcontent/uploads/sites/22/2020/08/sg_policy_brief_COVID19_and_education_august_2020.pdf
Weaver, K. (2010). But will it work?: Implementation analysis to improve government
performance. Issues in Government Studies, 32, 1–17. https://www.brookings.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2016/06/02_implementation_analysis_weaver.pdf
Worldometer. (2020). Nepal [data].
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/nepal/
Corresponding author: Sagun Shrestha
Email: sagun.shrestha2@gmail.com

181

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

182

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Online University Teaching at the time of COVID-19 (2020): An Australian
Perspective
Erika K. Smith
Western Sydney University
Australia
Ece Kaya
University of Technology Sydney
Australia

183

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Abstract
The impacts of COVID-19 have been widespread, and the education sector has not been
immune to its effects. In March 2020 Australian universities were forced into a shutdown,
which prompted an unanticipated, sudden shift in education, from on-campus and face-to-faceto an off-campus and online mode of teaching and learning. This paper describes theexperiences of two Sydney-based university unit coordinators, from two different institutions,
who rapidly shifted their units online as a result of COVID-19. In particular, it applies
reflection as a research method, to share what the authors’ encountered as successful, and what
was challenging about teaching online. Motivating and retaining students was a key challenge
identified by the authors. Therefore, the paper discusses the authors’ application of various
digital programs and tools in their response to this challenge of motivation and engagement. It
is hoped that our experiences might benefit those looking to integrate programs and tools in
the online teaching and learning space. Although Australia is currently one of the mostsuccessful countries in their handling of COVID-19, there is still great uncertainty about the
future. Globally the pandemic shows no signs of abating, as many countries struggle to manage
high levels of transmission and infection rates, which in turn have an impact on the education
sector more broadly. Consequently, online learning may be the ‘new normal’ for many
institutions in the near future. Therefore, it is important for educators to share their online
teaching experiences that can contribute to greater understandings of this space.
Keywords: COVID-19, higher education, online learning, online teaching, university

184

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

In the past two decades Australian higher education institutions and their teaching units haveexponentially increased the function of their online platforms to support face-to-face teaching.
On 18th March 2020, the Australian Government advised that “university and higher education
should continue at this time with risk mitigation measures, including working from homearrangements where effective” (Morrison, 2020, Universities and Other Higher Education
Centres section). For many Australian universities this announcement coincided with the startof the semester. In Sydney, Macquarie University responded to the COVID-19 pandemic bypausing all face-to-face and online teaching from 18th March (in their fourth week of session1), removing the mid semester break (13th - 26th April), thereby allowing the University to
prepare their transition to online teaching and learning. Similarly, University ofTechnology Sydney paused their teaching on 17th March to enable staff to prepare an online
mode of delivery for their subjects, and commenced online teaching on 24th March. At otheruniversities, the transition to online teaching and learning was immediate, and needed to be as
seamless as possible to maintain professionalism and quality education standards. For someteaching staff the online space was familiar territory, with many having used their university’s
online platform to complement face-to-face teaching to provide resources, lecture recordings,
conduct tests/quizzes, post readings and/or assessment resources. Aside from teachers having
to overcome gaps in technology infrastructure, the forced transition online meant that teachers
needed to become more knowledgeable and skilled with their institution’s online learning
platform, adjust approaches to pedagogy, rethink lesson plans, consider strategies for online
engagement and be more considerate of students’ circumstances that may impact on theirattendance, participation and/or timeliness of assessment submission.
This paper presents our experiences as university unit coordinators and teachers from two
different Sydney universities who transitioned our face-to-face teaching skills to the online
space in March 2020. When each of our universities transitioned to online teaching andlearning we were coordinating and teaching both undergraduate and postgraduate units thatwere comprised of domestic and international students. Online learning enabled our students
to continue their studies without delaying or pausing their degrees. The following sections
explore our experiences of online teaching and what we found improved the online learning
experiences of our students, the programs that we integrated to enhance engagement, thechallenges we encountered and some of the techniques we employed to counter some of thechallenges we came across while having to teach and promote learning in the online space insemester 1 (March-June), 2020.
Due to the scope of this paper and the need for data collection, this paper did not address one
key overarching challenge of online learning in the university sector. In Australia (and otherdeveloped nations) there is the general presumption that all students have a dedicated space intheir home to study effectively, have access to a computer, and have access to reliable internet
and/or technological devices. Data and research indicate that this is not the case.
Approximately 87% of Australians have access to the internet at home, but only 68% ofAustralian children (5-14 years old) living in disadvantaged communities have access to theinternet at home (Graham and Sahlberg, 2020). However, access does not equate to reliability,
especially for students who are studying online in remote or regional locations. Furthermore,‘more than four million Australians access the internet solely through a mobile connection’(Noble, 2020), which is impacted by mobile phone plan data limits, sharing (or hotspotting)and internet speeds. Much of the research published focuses on Australian children andteenagers, but university students are also negatively impacted by the same internet andtechnology challenges, especially those from racial and ethnic minority backgrounds, lower
socioeconomic backgrounds and those in rural or regional areas (Gillis and Krull, 2020). While185

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

some of our students made off-hand comments during the semester about one or more of thesechallenges (space, technology, internet), there are likely to be others who were severely
impacted by online learning that we did not hear from, who perhaps withdrew from study or
suffered academically as a result. Further research is required to ascertain this data because
without access to technology and reliable internet students will struggle to participate in online
learning, thereby widening the digital divide and educational divide.
Engagement
As higher education educators, we identify that engagement is “one of the most importantvariables for the learning process” (Kucuk & Richardson, 2019, p. 199). One of the mostaccepted theoretical frameworks for understanding online learning processes is the Communityof Inquiry (CoI) framework (Garrison et al, 2001; Garrison et al, 2010a). Central to the CoIframework are three elements (cognitive presence, teaching presence and social presence)
which “work together to create and maintain a collaborative community of inquiry andeffective learning processes in online education environments” (Kucuk & Richardson, 2019,p. 197). For online learning, these three elements of the CoI framework and their overlap reflect
the dynamics of online learning experiences that are key to sustaining and improving thequality of online education (Kucuk & Richardson, 2019; Garrison et al, 2010b). Cognitive
presence “refers to the extent to which online learners can construct and validate meaning basedon critical and continued communication and thinking” (Kozan & Richardson, 2014, p. 68) andrelates to the learning and inquiry process, based on the Practical Inquiry model that recognises
four phases in the inquiry process (Garrison et al, 2001): the definition of a problem or task;
exploration for relevant information/knowledge; making sense of and integrating ideas; and,
finally, testing plausible solutions’ (Garrison et al, 2010b). Teaching presence in the CoIframework is “the design, facilitation and direction of cognitive and social processes for the
purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes”(Anderson et al, 2001, p. 5). According to Garrison et al (2010b, p. 32) the first responsibilityof this element “is establishing curriculum content, learning activities, and timelines”, thesecond “is monitoring and managing purposeful collaboration and reflection”, and the third “isensuring that the community reaches the intended learning outcomes by diagnosing needs andproviding timely information and direction” (Kucuk & Richardson, 2019, p. 197).
We recognise that student engagement is “broad and there is no agreement on its meaning,definition, and measurement” (Mamun et al, 2016, p. 381). Rather, student engagement is “amulti-faceted construct which usually encompasses several subsets; each of which has its own
indicators” (Ding et al, 2018, p. 214). Nevertheless, it is widely accepted that the three different
types of student engagement are categorised as: behavioural engagement, cognitive
engagement and emotional engagement (Fredericks et al, 2004; Hu & Li, 2017; Reeve andTseng, 2011). In this paper, and its specific focus on online teaching and learning, we haveadopted Dixson’s definition of online student engagement, as… students using time and energy to learn materials and skills, demonstrating
learning, interacting in a meaningful way with others in the class (enough sothat those people become ‘real’), and becoming at least somewhat
emotionally involved with their learning (i.e. getting excited about an idea,
enjoying the learning and/or interaction) (Dixson, 2015 p. 4).
Dixson (2010) reports that students find online activities where they can apply theories to casestudies, do group work, discussion blogs and work on assignments that relate to recent events

186

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

encouraging. Furthermore, she also states that the active involvement of the instructor and afeeling of connection with the instructor creates a positive online learning environment
for students (Dixson, 2010). Students value an online learning environment that caters sense of
belonging, that is welcoming and provides meaningful learning experiences. Within thatenvironment they feel connected and engaged, especially when collaborative
learning exercises are included in the teaching practices, students’ participation and theircritical thinking skills increase (Young & Bruce, 2011). Facilitating discussions by using
active teaching-learning processes assists students’ engagement in understanding the key ideas
for them. However, too much instructor participation in the discussions has a tendency
to decrease student engagement (Dennen et al., 2007). Therefore, learning in the online spaceneeds to involve student-to-student and student-to-instructor communication (Dixson, 2010).
Although the focus of this paper is on engagement in the online space, it must be acknowledgedthat because the students we were teaching did not choose to have their learning carried out
entirely online, the experiences that we faced as teachers differs to the pre-COVID-19 (pre2020) literature and research on online student engagement. In pre-COVID-19 times, students
undertaking online learning, volunteered to do so, or at the least are aware that their learning
will be delivered wholly/partly online. Research indicates that higher education students who
enrol in an online mode of education are often non-traditional students, who do so because it
provides flexibility (Oblinger, 2003; Redmond, 2018). For those who do not volunteer for
online learning, “… an online environment might benefit certain types of engagement, but may
also be somewhat of a deterrent to others” (Dumford & Miller, 2018, p. 452). Our students in
2020, like many others, were forced to transition online, or chose to withdraw from theirstudies. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic did not only impact higher education students
and their education, for many it also had impacts on their employment, living circumstances,family and carer’s responsibilities (including higher education students who had children who
were home-schooling), all of which had cascading effects on relationships, mental health andwellbeing. For us, as teachers who were previously teaching in face-to-face, on-campus
settings, there was a real rush to become more aware of engagement that was specific to online
contexts. This experience was not unique to us, “the fast transition to remote teaching during
the COVID-19 pandemic made forethought and planning for course aspects that are related toengagement difficult” (Garris & Fleck, 2020, p. 3).
Rethinking Lectures for the Online SpaceThe approach to lectures differed between us. Smith used pre-recorded lectures to run
asynchronously, and Kaya ran live lectures. Each of these approaches had its benefits andchallenges, as explored in the following paragraphs.
Pre-Recorded Lectures
From week 4 of Semester 1, Smith created pre-recorded lectures in Zoom that were uploaded
to Panopto, through Western Sydney University’s (WSU) online platform, Blackboard. Prerecorded lectures are an important ‘part of providing flexible education environments that
address the diverse needs of students in higher education’ in a variety of ways, such as pace,
place and time (Larkin 2010 p. 238). The most notable, positive aspect of pre-recorded lectures
is the flexibility it allows for students to view the lecture, where to view the lecture, ability topause and later resume the lecture, and the various ways it could be viewed (such as: computer,phone, streamed through the television, and audio). The additional benefit of pre-recorded
lectures is the ability for students to replay lectures at any point in the semester and alter the
speed of delivery (faster or slower) to suit their learning preferences. Panopto also has a187

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

captions (subtitles) function. However, Smith identified frequent errors in their accuracy andso they were not used in her pre-recorded lectures to avoid confusion. Nevertheless, thesefeatures may be useful to students from non-English speaking backgrounds and/or international
students, but they may present challenges for some students with learning disabilities.
The flexibility of pre-recorded lecturers and online learning more broadly, requires thatstudents possess digital competencies, which research suggests is not always evident.
Therefore, the idea that students are what Prensky (2001) termed ‘Digital Natives’, “is by nomeans the universal student experience” (Kennedy et al., 2008 p.117). Furthermore, “simply
because students have grown up with increasingly ubiquitous and advanced digitaltechnologies does not mean that they naturally know how to study in online spaces” (Scull etal., 2020 p. 6). Smith’s experience teaching her unit online during Semester 1 supported thesestatements, that students are not homogeneous in their digital competence, nor does digitalcompetency regarding everyday digital use mean that students know how to instinctively oreasily navigate the university’s online platform. As a result of the varying digital competenciesof students, additional time spent in tutorials was required to explain how to navigate the
WSU’s online platform so that accessing all unit materials was understood. This experience
resonates with previous studies that have highlighted that when students are learning online,
they require assistance and support with time management and self-regulation (Cho and Shen,
2013; Dabbagh, 2003; Douglas, 2019; Kent, 2015; Scull et al., 2020). The main challenge that
this posed was that time spent navigating the features of the WSU’s online platform took timeaway from teaching unit content in tutorials.
Using Panopto to create pre-recorded lectures had numerous beneficial features, such as theability to edit lecture recordings, insert videos and quizzes, and have statistics collected on
student views (including number of views and percentage of the lecture viewed), which isuseful for units that have attendance requirements. Smith’s experience of creating pre-recorded
lectures highlighted that the process: preparing (scaffolding/story boarding), recording andediting lectures was significantly more time consuming than presenting on campus, face-toface lectures. While pre-recorded lectures allow “opportunity for the lecturer to listen to therecordings and reflect on lecturing styles, points of emphasis and content”, editing lectures canbe time consuming, especially for early career academics who are new to lecturing and lackthe confidence gained from experience (Larkin, 2010 p. 246). However, pre-recorded lectures
removed student interruptions or disrupting behaviour (such as: talking, late arriving students,
early exiting students, doors opening and closing, mobile phone alerts) which may assist
inexperienced lecturers, or lecturers who view lectures as the transmission of knowledge or a‘sage on the stage’, teacher-centred approach. Under different circumstances, when teaching
staff know prior to semester commencing that pre-recorded lectures are the method of lecturedelivery, there is time to prepare. Unfortunately, the rapid shift to the online space in March
2020 due to COVID-19 meant that making pre-recorded lectures available for students a week
in advance created additional pressure. Lecturers’ experience of pressure and stress as a resultof creating lecture content for the online space in 2020 is more accurately described as“emergency remote teaching … put together in great haste to deal with an emergency situation”(Boud, cited in Baker, 2020).
A last point on the topic of pre-recorded lectures is that it is not easy to hold the attention of
students for 90 minutes in the same way that an on campus, face-to-face lecture would,
especially if there is no lecture attendance requirement. As previously discussed, on campus,
face-to-face lectures offer students opportunities to be involved in the content that pre-recorded
lectures cannot provide. This was observed when Smith reviewed lecture viewer statistics

188

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

through the ‘stats’ function in Panopto. Panopto’s ability to gather and report statistics on
student lecture views does not determine whether the lecture was actually viewed by the student(students can play the lecture while they are not physically viewing the lecture). Nevertheless,the statistics provide a guide as to how much of the lecture was viewed by each student and atwhich point, they ceased viewing. Smith observed that while most students were initiating thelectures, there were many who did not complete viewing them to the end. This observation is
supported by Professor David Boud, director of the Centre for Research in Assessment at
Deakin University (Melbourne, Victoria), who stated that “you have to package up lecturesthat have been recorded and are too long, they’re not designed to be dealt with in that medium”(Boud, cited in Baker, 2020, para. 16). As a result of low lecture views, Smith began to divide
90-minute lecture recordings into three parts in the hope that students would find viewing themmore manageable. Students were asked for their feedback, comparing their preference of asingle, 90-minute lecture recording, to multiple, shorter recordings. The statistics on prerecorded lecture views demonstrated that a greater number of students had viewed lectures
when they were the latter, compared to a single, 90-minute lecture recording.
The previous paragraph mentioned that pre-recorded lecturers remove student interruptions,but it is important to note that not all student disruptions are negative. When teaching on
campus both Kaya and Smith invite student participation by asking questions, taking polls,
asking students to speak to one another, and welcome questions from students who want further
clarification on lecture content. This kind of student involvement during lectures assists
lecturers in gauging what students know, what parts of the content they might be struggling
with, and encourages engagement with content that pre-recorded lecturers cannot offer. The
aforementioned information allows lecturers to pause and revise content which enhances
understanding and the student learning experience. Similarly, encouraging students to share
their experiences or answer questions provides richer discussions that are not achieved withpre-recorded lectures. In this sense, the challenge of pre-recorded lectures is that it may be“convenient for lecturers but not good for learning” (Boud, cited in Baker, 2020, para. 17).
Live Lectures (Online)
It is an optimistic expectation to wait for students to attend the live lectures and take notes inthe same way they would do in a face-to-face lecture. Therefore, the ability to engage requires
effective use of technology. Kaya delivered synchronous online lectures (also known as “livelectures”) through Zoom, where students attend at a scheduled time. The chat tool, screen
annotation, polling, non-verbal and verbal feedback buttons and breakout rooms in Zoom
create engagement when students are off-campus, and it also supports other teaching andlearning functions, such as hosting office hours or small group discussions. Zoom-run live
lectures can be accessed on laptops, desktops, tablets, smartphones, and even desk phones,
giving students flexibility in how they attend live lectures. During these live lectures, Kaya
included activities within the delivery of the lecture content. Such activities not only help
students with assessment preparation, but it also encourages active involvement in live lectures
for the purposes of creating more enjoyable and enriching lectures. Students learn more when
they engage in an active learning process rather than passive audiences, and similarly active
teaching practices increases attendance (Deslauriers et al., 2019), encourages interaction andengagement, supports peer collaboration, and develops positive students’ attitudes toward thesubjects that they are studying.
Unlike walking into a lecture theatre on campus, or speaking into a lectern microphone, live
lectures (online) require alternative ways to commence. Opening a 90-minute live lecture witha question prompts student attention and “sets the scene” of the lecture. Based on Kaya’s

189

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

experiences, it was evident that periodic questioning kept students’ attention and contributed
to an active learning process during live lectures. This is where Kaya found microteachingvaluable. Microteaching focuses on the importance of delivering specific information within alimited timeframe. Thus, lesson planning in microteaching requires concise, appropriate andrelevant content. It involves the steps of plan, teach, observe, re-plan, re-teach and re-observe.
These steps enable us to modify the teaching-learning process to integrate skills learned fromthe three major phases in microteaching; knowledge acquisition, skill acquisition andintegration, and feedback, all of which provide a valuable understanding in transferring theperformance to the classroom (Remesh, 2013). Students’ attention is around 10-15 minutes,
then they start to drift (Felder & Brent 1999). Therefore, using microteaching techniques inlive lectures, dividing the lecture content into 15 minutes sessions, and including periodic
questioning, rather than delivering an entire lecture at once, was a strategy that demonstrated
greater levels of student engagement, by way of attention and participation. An observation
was that students would become familiar with other students, and these interactions would
continue in online tutorials, especially when students were asked about their impressions andunderstandings of the lecture content.
Online Tutorials: How Can We Energise Students and Retain Engagement?
Online learning is not “slapping classroom content online” (O’Neil et al., 2008, p. 18), it mustbe purposeful and transformative (Budhai & Williams, 2016). A 2020 Monash University study
that interviewed teaching staff who taught online as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic,
similarly found that “online learning is a different type of learning, it’s not just a transfer acrossfrom face-to-face classes” (Scull et al., 2020 p. 4). Our experiences of teaching online support
these statements, that an effective online pedagogy focuses on student-centred learning andapplies active learning practices which include collaborative and individual tasks thatencourage students to share and discuss ideas with their peers. Therefore, this section of thepaper focuses on online tutorials, specifically what we identified as instrumental in maintaining
quality teaching standards, and in encouraging student engagement and participation in the
online space.
The INSPIRE model (Table 1) of expert tutoring points out that successful tutors are identified
as intelligent, nurturant, socratic, progressive, indirect, reflective and encouraging (Lepper &Wolverton, 2002; Wood & Tanner, 2012) and we suggest that the model can be adopted as a
strategy to support students during their online learning processes. Although the model wasdeveloped based on a study conducted in primary and secondary school mathematics, it canalso meet the needs of students in higher education, and the effective tutoring strategies can betransferable to the large lecture setting and stimulate student engagement in both lectures andtutorials.

190

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Table 1: The INSPIRE model of expert tutoring (Lepper & Wolverton, 2002; Wood &Tanner, 2012)
Characteristics of expert tutors
Intelligent
Nurturant
Socratic
Progressive
Indirect
Reflective
Encouraging

Results for students
Difficulty of the content optimally matched to students’level of understanding
Feeling accepted, supported, and free to explain theirthinking
Constantly thinking, doing, and responding
Moving in small steps to higher competency throughdeliberate practice
Working in a nonjudgmental atmosphere
Articulating their thinking, explain their reasoning, andgeneralize to other contexts
Experiencing productive learning and gaining
confidence in their abilities

Kaya designed her online tutorials as spaces where students can construct, explore, resolve,
and confirm meanings through collaboration and reflection. In this process, Dewey’s conceptof reflective thinking (Sun & Chen, 2016) enabled students to work on questions, retrieve
information and find their ways of resolution.
Critical and creative thinking are essential to developing analytical and evaluative skills andunderstandings in the Australian Curriculum (Ab Kadir, 2016). We argue that activities that
foster critical and creative thinking include both independent and collaborative tasks and entailtransition between ways of thinking. It is imperative to establish tutorial environments wherestudents and teachers collaborate, actively discuss, and articulate activities and assessments forthe purpose of students to demonstrate their critical and creative thinking (Reid & Petocz,
2004). In addition to designing activities that encourage and develop critical and creative
thinking, the importance of motivation and retaining students must be discussed.
Motivating and Engaging Students
While lectures present information to all enrolled students in a more formal sense, tutorials are
typically more dynamic, consisting of smaller groups where the lecture content and reading/s
are integrated and discussed. Both authors exclusively used Zoom to conduct online tutorials
in Semester 1, 2020, allowing for a range of strategies. One strategy that we both implemented
in our online tutorial design was to begin by asking students if there were any questions basedon the lecture content or readings that needed clarification. This open discussion time was a
strategy that allowed additional time for late arriving students to join. A creative and engaging
segue from this informal discussion to the tutorial was to sometimes include a game. Ding etal (2018, p. 214) state that “empirical studies examining gamification in promoting student
learning are sparse”, that most studies are quantitative, and that “only a few studies investigated
the gamification approach from the educator’s perspective”.
A popular game-based student response system (GSRS) we integrated into some of ourtutorials was Kahoot! Its platform, which includes a web-based creator tool, makes it easy tocreate a quiz with two to four multiple choice answers that have timed opportunities to answer.
We integrated Kahoot! into our online pedagogy, because like other GSRSs, it “enriched thequality of student learning in the classroom, with the highest influence reported on classroom

191

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

dynamics, engagement, motivation and improved learning experience” (Licorish et al., 2018,p. 1). Ding et al (2018, p. 214) explain that the “majority of the existing research reported thatthe gamification approach can have [a] positive influence on student learning, such asencouraging participation and bolstering interests in learning”. Based on our experiences
implementing Kahoot!’s basic plan (which is free) into our pedagogy, we observed numerous
positive effects, including its ease of use, creativity (allowing the insertion of images andvideo), providing real-time feedback for students and teachers, ability for students to playanonymously, creating a sense of community and fosters an entertaining environment, like thatof a game show (Licorish et al., 2018, p. 4). Kahoot! with its simple user interface and stepby-step set-up makes the GSRS extremely easy to use for both creators and players. The ability
to attach images and/or video to the question design add layers of creativity to the GSRS andprovides opportunities for lecture or reading images/content to be reintroduced (memory andrecall).
The following figures are examples of the Kahoot! questions that Smith posed in her tutorials
following a lecture on several sociological theories (see Figures 1 - 3). The Kahoot! quiz
required students to match the explanation with the most appropriate sociological theory.
Considering the context (COVID-19) that resulted in online tutorials, Smith would joke thatfirst prize was a roll of toilet paper (this was a commodity that was difficult to find stocked inAustralian supermarkets); second prize was hand sanitiser, and third prize was a face mask.

Figure 1: Kahoot! quiz question example 1, Semester 1

Figure 2: Kahoot! quiz question example 2, Semester 1 2020192

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Figure 3: Kahoot! quiz question example 3, Semester 1 2020
Some have linked Kahoot!’s background colour scheme and music during play to that of agame show, which adds to the excitement, novelty and creativity of the GSRS in educationalsettings (Licorish et al., 2018; Wang, 2015;). It has also been observed that a large part of
Kahoot!’s appeal for students is that it allows for students to participate anonymously, as they
have the ability to select alternative names or aliases, therefore encouraging students toparticipate even if they do not feel confident that they may know the content well or will answer
correctly. For some students, the anonymity when playing Kahoot! creates a sense of safety toparticipate without the fear of being shamed by others. Many students took this opportunity toadopt a pseudonym, and some adopted known pseudonyms, such as Karl Marx and theAustralian Prime Minister. Aside from students engaging in creative pseudonyms, thiscontributes to the social aspect of the tutorial dynamic and more creative and humorous ways
to be involved in the game. There is a cultural phenomenon in Australian (and New Zealand)society whereby students may be reluctant to answer questions or avoid opportunities todemonstrate their knowledge or understanding for fear of criticism of being perceived as a highachiever, or for standing out from the group, known as “Tall Poppy Syndrome” (Licorish etal., 2018). At the end of the game a podium is displayed with the names of the top three players(or teams). In some instances where the top players used pseudonyms, those students did not
identify themselves to the class, perhaps because of the fear of being perceived by their peers
as egotistical (Tall Poppy Syndrome). Therefore, based on these experiences implementing
Kahoot! into online tutorials, offering students the option to adopt a pseudonym is an importantfeature to encourage participation.
Smith would preface the game by stating that playing Kahoot! is not a test and is not about
making students feel as though they do not know the content; it is about testing your consciousand subconscious recall of the lecture and readings, seeing what you know well and what areas
you may need to revise, and it contributes to your continued learning of the content. Often thisfurther encouraged students to participate, to test themselves and what content they know welland what they may need to revise. This aspect was beneficial in providing real-time feedback
for students and teachers. On the one hand students can quickly identify what areas they recall,
and what areas they may need to familiarise themselves with in order to answer the questions
correctly. And on the other hand, teachers are able to gather quick insight into what theirstudents recall, and what areas may require further revision. If in the case that many of thestudents incorrectly answer one or several of the answers, an improvised adjustment to thetutorial lesson plan, to allow the teacher to revise those areas, is possible.

193

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Similar to lectures, tutorials require preparation, regardless of whether they take place on
campus or online. Unsurprisingly, we found that tutorial content for the online space had to beplanned differently to face-to-face tutorials, with a particular intention to motivate engagement
and enhance participation. This planning drew on the previously discussed CoI framework andthe three elements: teaching presence, social presence and cognitive presence, with the aim ofcreating and “maintaining a collaborative online community of enquiry and effective learning
processes in online education environments” (Kucuk & Richardson, 2019, p. 197). Planning(part of the teaching presence element) was particularly important in relation to designing
breakout room activities, the timing of the activities and discussions with the whole tutorial
after a breakout room activity. Breakout rooms have been identified as beneficial because they
allow the teacher relief from presenting (Chandler 2016), but more importantly, they facilitate
collaboration, interaction as well contribution to the content or the lesson plan (part of thesocial presence element). The University of Technology Sydney (UTS) Learner Experience(LX) Team provided pedagogic techniques for effective breakout rooms in Zoom. The LX
Team emphasised the importance of assigning clear tasks for students in Zoom tutorials withconsideration of matching the time and number of students to the task, providing students withlinks to shared documents in the chat for collaborative notetaking, keeping the same student
groups, and the importance of monitoring group discussions by having the host (teacher) enter
breakout rooms (LX Team, 2020).
Both authors found that most weeks at least 80% of enrolled students were present at any given(online) tutorial in semester 1, 2020. Kaya had up to 40 enrolled students, and Smith had up to
30 enrolled students when tutorials shifted online. Although there was a good tutorialattendance rate, the number of enrolled students in an online tutorial was the key challenging
factor that we identified in influencing our tutorial lesson planning, specifically: the number ofbreakout room activities, the time for breakout room activities and the time allocated for wholetutorial discussions. Based on the units that we taught, the ideal breakout room sizes comprisedof at least three students and a maximum of five students. For Kaya, breakout rooms frequently
contained ten students in order to allow time for each group to report back to the whole tutorial.
As a result, students often reported that they did not feel that they had equal or enoughopportunity to speak in their breakout rooms, and when reporting back to the whole tutorial.
Other students reported being bored by activities in such large groups.
Smith had smaller online tutorial sizes; however, a key challenge that she observed was thatmany students elected to switch their cameras off. This visual withdrawing from tutorials in
effect conflicts with a teacher’s ability to observe classroom practice which is a vital aspect inimproving teacher practice that in turn improves student learning (Australian Institute for
Teaching and School Leadership, 2017). In face-to-face tutorial settings observed visual cues
from students include nodding and being able to see where eyes are focused (for example, theirmobile phone, the floor, the board, the teacher, their peers). However, when these visual cues
are not observable, as was the case when students had their cameras switched off, it impacted
Smith’s ability to adjust her pedagogy, specifically to make “judgements about if, and wheninterventions are necessary, as well as decide what those interventions might be” (Rooney &Boud, 2019, p. 444). As research has shown, student engagement online is a key component ofeffective online learning, and when students do not have opportunities for face-to-faceinteraction, students tend to disengage from online discussions (Ding et al, 2018, p. 214).
Although most students were wholly or partly listening (as tested by the teacher’s request for
students to display an emoji such as a clap or thumbs up when prompted) it became clear thatsome students were either engaged in other activities or away from their device. This wasevidenced in two primary ways, firstly when breakout rooms were formed some students would

194

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

remain in the main tutorial instead of accepting their breakout room allocation. These lingering
students would be asked, both verbally and in the chat by Smith if they were experiencing
technical issues, with many either not responding for several minutes or for the entire time of
the breakout room activity. Secondly, when Smith would enter each breakout room to answer
questions and check on the progress of an activity, some students would not be contributing to
the group’s discussion. Students did express (either to the whole tutorial when having to reporttheir group’s results, or privately to Smith in the Zoom chat or by email) that this was afrustrating aspect of online tutorials, that those who were present and contributing felt burdenedwith the responsibility of having to complete activities without the support and contribution of
all group members. It became clear, early into the shift from face-to-face to online teaching
and learning, that designing well thought out, problem-based learning activities would be key
to motivating student participation in online tutorials.
Given that the pandemic is so recent, it is unsurprising that little research has been on effective
strategies for improving student engagement in online tutorials. It was reported in one paperthat teachers were frustrated with students in online tutorials who elected to turn their cameras
off because they perceived that students were being disrespectful, and secondly, that students
were appearing to attend but were not actively participating (Stafford, 2020). However,teachers’ frustrated “assumptions ignore the complexities of online study in general, andspecifically during this pandemic” (Stafford, 2020, p. 151). Indeed, for some students, turning
their cameras off during tutorials improved their internet connectivity. For others, having theircamera off was important for privacy reasons as they multitasked their children’s homeschooling responsibilities, while for others, their home environments were not spaces that theyfelt comfortable sharing with their peers. Therefore, the suggestion by one teacher that “astudent wouldn’t hide their face in the physical classroom so why would they do it online?”
ignores “the complexities of online study in general, and specifically during this pandemic”(Stafford, 2020, p. 151). However, it is important that educators strike a balance between giving
students allowances in the COVID-19 pandemic context, and providing leniencies to students
that only serve to further isolate and disconnect them (Dixson, 2015), the latter being a concernof online learning prior to the pandemic.
In terms of tools that were effective in student-led discussions and collaboration there wereseveral that Kaya engaged with to complement online tutorials. Assigning activities by using
technology and online tools activates students’ teamwork skills and gives them the opportunity
to practise their leadership and management skills. Sometimes students do not prefer to reportback to the whole tutorial cohort, but rather they enjoy the discussions in their group and talking
to the tutor when they join their breakout rooms. Kaya used various tools and platforms such
as Google Docs, Google slides, Google Jamboard, Padlet, Lucidchart and Canvas during theonline semesters. The use of Padlet demonstrated that being creative is more valuable thanbeing high tech in tutorials. The following figure is an example of a Padlet created by students
while they practised problem solving tools in business examples. Students were asked to workin their breakout room groups on mini-case scenarios, specifically identifying and analysing
the problems. Similar to Kahoot!, Padlet allows students to participate anonymously, which aspreviously mentioned in relation to Kahoot! has positive effects on student participation.

195

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Figure 4: Example of Padlet
Google’s Jamboard (Figure 5) was another effective tool that allowed for students tocollaborate with their peers in online tutorials. Jamboard can be used to create storyboards andwrite stories. Brainstorming has become a fun activity and allowed students to write their own
notes, ideas as well as add images and figures.

Figure 5: Example of Jamboard
Our experiences teaching tutorials online made us acutely aware that it is easy tounintentionally slip into a teacher-centred mode of tutorial delivery, especially when students
are reluctant to turn their cameras on and/or do not engage by responding, verbally or throughthe Zoom chat function. It becomes easy for the tutor to fill the void of blank screens and silent

196

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

gaps with the answers, but doing so limits and disservices many of the pedagogical strategies
that contemporary teachers identify as pillars of learning such as peer interaction, collaborative
learning and inquiry-based learning, all of which support the diverse and dynamic ways thatstudents learn.
Conclusion
This paper anticipated that our experiences might benefit those looking to integrate programsand tools in the online teaching and learning space, such as Panopto, Zoom, Kahoot!, Google
Jamboard and Padlet that the authors applied in their teaching in order to respond to thosechallenges and create a positive online learning environment for students. It is worth notingthat at the end of Semester 1 (2020) the student feedback that we each received about our
teaching was overwhelmingly positive. Many students made specific mention to the inclusionof online tutorial activities and tools that made classes more enjoyable, interactive and helpful
in solidifying course content. Students’ explicit mention of the activities and tools that wereincorporated into lessons, reaffirmed our view that teachers cannot simply transfer their oncampus lecture and lesson plans to the online space, online learning needs to be thought out
and planned in different ways. At the time of writing this paper, Australia was recognised as
being one of the most successful countries in their handling of COVID-19, having been ranked
8th in the world by the Lowy Institute (Dziedzic, 2021). Even with the commenced rollout ofvaccines worldwide, the pandemic is far from over as many countries continue to struggle tomanage transmission and infection rates. Consequently, this has an impact on the education
sector and online learning may be part of the solution for many institutions in the present andnear future. Therefore, it is essential that educators continue to share their online teachingexperiences so that we can build our knowledge of digital pedagogical tools. Furthermore,educators who seek to explore and invest time into the ever-changing digital space, specifically
online educational programs and tools, and incorporate them into their teaching will be able tovastly improve the learning experience and motivation of their students. This is especially
important now as the education sector is in a continuing state of uncertainty as a result of thepandemic. Online education used to be an alternative for some students, but due to the abruptchange in circumstances as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, online learning may havemore longevity than educators had previously imagined. In fact, some universities are now
looking to integrate more online teaching and learning, especially regarding lectures, as
existing lecture theatres make social distancing an impossible task for universities to resolvein the near future. Western Sydney University (WSU) is incorporating HyFlex for some units
in 2021- a hybrid learning environment with a flexible course structure that gives students theoption of attending tutorials face-to-face, online, or both. Institutional changes to integrate amore hybrid teaching and learning environment justifies the need for further research andpublications on the topic of online teaching and learning.

197

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

References
Ab Kadir, M. A. (2016). Critical thinking and learner diversity in the Australian Curriculum:
implications and epistemological tensions. International Journal of Pedagogies andLearning, 11(3), 225–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/22040552.2016.1272530
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (2017) Classroom observation
strategies. https://www.aitsl.edu.au/lead-develop/develop-others/classroomobservation/classroom-observation-strategies
Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence
in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks,5(2). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v5i2.1875
Baker, J. (2020, October 30). ‘Time for reform’: The university lecture may not survive
COVID-19. The Sydney Morning Herald. https://www.smh.com.au/national/time-forreform-the-university-lecture-may-not-survive-covid-19-20201030-p56a10.html
Budhai, S., & Williams, M. (2016). Teaching presence in online courses: Practicalapplications, Co-facilitation, and technology integration. Journal of Effective
Teaching 16(3), 76–84. http://doi.org/10.1186/s41077-020-00141-1
Chandler, K. (2016). Using breakout rooms in synchronous online tutorials. Journal of
Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice, 4(3), 16–23.
https://doi.org/10.14297/jpaap.v4i3.216
Dennen, V. P., Aubteen Darabi, A., & Smith, L. J. (2007). Instructor–learner interaction in
online courses: The relative perceived importance of particular instructor actions on
performance and satisfaction. Distance education, 28(1), 65–79.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910701305319
Dixson, M. D. (2010). Creating effective student engagement in online courses: What dostudents find engaging? Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2),1–13. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ890707.pdf
Dziedzic, S. (2021, January 28). New Zealand tops Lowy Institute list as country with best
response to coronavirus, Australia sits eighth. ABC News.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-28/new-zealand-tops-list-as-country-with-bestcovid-response/13095758
Felder, R. M. & Brent, R. (1999). How to improve teaching quality. Quality Management
Journal, 6, 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10686967.1999.11919183
Garris, C. P., & Fleck, B. (2020). Student evaluations of transitioned-online courses during
the COVID-19 pandemic. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology.
Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000229
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence,and computer conferencing in distance education. The American Journal of Distance
Education, 15(1), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640109527071
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2010a). The first decade of the Community ofInquiry framework: A retrospective. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(1-2), 5–9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.003

198

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Fung, T. S. (2010b). Exploring causal relationships
among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student perceptions of theCommunity of Inquiry framework. The Internet and Higher Education, 13, 31–36.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.002
Gillis, A. & Krull, L. M. (2020). COVID-19 remote learning transition in Spring 2020: Class
structures, student perceptions, and inequality in college courses. Teaching Sociology,
48(4), 283–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X20954263
Graham, A. & Sahlberg, P. (2020, March 26). Schools are moving online, but not all children
start out digitally equal. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/schools-aremoving-online-but-not-all-children-start-out-digitally-equal-134650
Hu, M., & Li, H. (2017, June). Student engagement in online learning: A review. In F. L.
Wang, O. Au, K. K. Ng, J. Shang & R. Kwan (Eds.), 2017 International Symposiumon Educational Technology (ISET) (pp. 39–43). https://doi.org/10.1109/ISET.2017.17
Kennedy, G. E., Judd, T. S., Churchward, A. & Gray, K. (2008). First year students’experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives? Australasian Journal of
Educational Technology, 24(1), 108–122. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1233
Larkin, H. E. (2010). "But they won’t come to lectures ..." The impact of audio recorded
lectures on student experience and attendance. Australasian Journal of Educational
Technology. 26(2), 238–249. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1093
Licorish, S. A., Owen, H. E., Daniel, B., & George, J. L. (2018). Students’ perception of
Kahoot!’s influence on teaching and learning. Research and Practice in Technology
Enhanced Learning, 13(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-018-0078-8
Lepper, M. R., & Woolverton, M. (2002). The wisdom of practice: Lessons learned from thestudy of highly effective tutors. In J. Aronson (Ed.), Improving academic achievement(pp. 135–158). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012064455-1/50010-5
LX Team. (2020, December 16). Manage your Zoom breakout room effectively. UTS.
https://lx.uts.edu.au/collections/using-zoom-for-teaching/resources/managing-yourzoom-breakout-room-effectively/
Mamun, M.A., Lawrie, G. & Wright, T. (2016). Student behavioural engagement in selfpaced online learning. In S. Barker, S. Dawson, A. Pardo, & C. Colvin (Eds.), Showme the learning. proceedings (pp. 381–366). ASCILITE, 2016.
Morrison, S. (18 March 2020). ‘Update on Coronavirus measures’ [Press Release],https://www.pm.gov.au/media/update-coronavirus-measures
Noble, K. (2020, April 3). School closures will increase inequality unless urgent action closes
the digital divide. The Age. https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/schoolclosures-will-increase-inequality-unless-urgent-action-closes-the-digital-divide20200331-p54fjq.html
Oblinger, D. (2003). Boomers, gen-xers, & millennials. Educause, July-August, 37–47.
Prenksy, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.
https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
Redmond, P., Heffernan, A., Abawi, L., Brown, A., & Henderson, R. (2018). An online
engagement framework for higher education. Online Learning, 22(1), 183–204.
https://doi.org/10.24059/oljv22il.1175

199

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Reeve, J., & Tseng, C.-M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during
learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 257–267.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002
Reid, A., & Petocz, P. (2004). Learning domains and the process of creativity. The Australian
Educational Researcher, 31(2), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03249519
Remesh, A. (2013). Microteaching, an efficient technique for learning effective teaching.
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, 18, 158–163.
https://doi.org/10.21013/irajems.v4.n2.p7
Rooney, D., Boud, D. (2020) Correction to: Toward a pedagogy for professional noticing:
Learning through observation. Vocations and Learning (13) 367, 441–457.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-019-09239-8
Scull, J., Phillips, M., Sharma, U. & Garnier, K. (2020) Innovations in teacher education at
the time of COVID19: an Australian perspective. Journal of Education for Teaching,46(4), 497–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1802701
Stafford, V (2020) EdTech review: Teaching through Zoom – what we’ve learned as new
online educators. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, (3) 2, 150–153.
https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2020.3.2.14
Sun, A., & Chen, X. (2016). Online education and its effective practice: A research review.
Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 15, 157–190.
https://doi.org/10.28945/3502
Wang, A. I. (2015). The wear out effect of a game-based student response system, Computers& Education, 82, 217–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.004
Wood, W. B., & Tanner, K. D. (2012). The role of the lecturer as tutor: doing what effective
tutors do in a large lecture class. CBE life sciences education, 11(1), 3–9.
https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.11-12-0110
Young, S., & Bruce, M. A. (2011). Classroom community and student engagement in online
courses. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(2), 219–230.
http://doi.org/10.1080/08923640802664466
Corresponding author: Erika Smith
Email: e.smith@westernsydney.edu.au200

Special Issue: COVID-19: Education Response to a Pandemic

Volume 9 – Issue 2 – 2021

Reviewers – Volume 9, Issue 2
The editorial team would like to thank the following reviewers for their contributions to thepeer review of this issue. Their dedication and assistance are greatly appreciated.
Nina Adriano
Catarina Araujo
Shiao-wei Chu
Melinda Cowart
Pankaj Das
Ilaris De Santis
Saadia ElaminJohn Michael Faller
Mikel Garant
Ana Garcia Diaz
Daniel Hoffman
Habsah Hussin
Andrew Leichsenring
Debbie Meharg
Elena Mishieva
Leonardo Munalim
Suja Nair
Cuong Nguyen
Maryam Niami
Mirella Ramicciotti
Najwa Saba’Ayon
Claudia Sanchez
Ruben Sanchez
Bethe Schoenfeld
Meliha Simsek
Maria Staton
Dominika Stolinska
Jean Tayag
Genevieve Thraves
Stephanie Wendt
Joyce Yang

201

the iafor

journal of education

ISSN: 2187-0594