## 3 Results
### Overall Results
#### 3.3.1 Students  
In terms of economic-material agreement, it was found that the technology represented both a possibility or a limitation for the promotion of an effective teaching and learning process. In the focus group, one student stated that when the learning management system allowed the interaction with the professor and classmates, the educational process was more meaningful: \"For example, having to enter links to blogs, to surveys... As you mentioned, what we did last class that we had to do surveys and questionnaires. I think they are a very effective tool because you can learn from other classmates, and you can share your learning\" (focus group). Another aspect to highlight was the importance of the diversity of learning materials that promoted learning according to the needs of each student: \"I think that the professor knew how to manage the subject and gave us not only lectures but also ways to make the class more dynamic since we would watch videos and films on how it was related to the computer and its history\" (focus group). Finally, the students highlighted the relevance of synchronous videoconferences as a complement to the activities on the platform: \"As for Zoom, the truth is that I liked Zoom better. It has several tools that are actually really cool since the administration professor made virtual groups\" (focus group). Contrary to the analysis of good practice in promoting learning, students stated that not all the strategies used by their professors were effective. A first observation consisted in the lack of competence development for practically oriented subjects: \"the other optional subject which was containers and packages. So, like to make boxes, design them a little, propose and think of a complete project that in the end should have been pretty practical but the problem was that that subject stopped being practical and become part theoretical of lectures and analysis\" (interview). An additional factor was centered on the monotony of educational materials and the lack of meaningful evaluation: \"I think we did lack that feedback from the professors that only sent a PDF. As in, they sent a PDF each week and you don't get that feedback from them\" (interview). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Material–Economic Agreement**} \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Perspective/Evaluation} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Educational actors} \\ \cline{2-4}  & Students & Professors & Managers \\ \hline Strength (Positive) & 53 & 37 & 39 \\ \hline Weakness (Negative) & 61 & 13 & 24 \\ \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Cultural-Discursive Agreement**} \\ \hline Perspective/Evaluation & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Educational actors} \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Strength (Positive)} & Students & Professors & Managers \\ \hline Strength (Positive) & 18 & 16 & 13 \\ \hline Weakness (Negative) & 13 & 2 & 6 \\ \hline \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Socio-Political Agreement**} \\ \hline Perspective/Evaluation & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Educational actors} \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Students} & Students & Professors & Managers \\ \hline Strength (Positive) & 33 & 29 & 32 \\ \hline Weakness (Negative) & 25 & 6 & 16 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Overall results. When it came to the cultural-discursive agreement, students participated in communication processes with other educational actors (professors and students) to promote academic achievement and a sense of belonging. The first element that students highlighted was the organization and systematization of the professors to carry out their daily communication: \"what I found very useful and I was very grateful about was how much the professors only used one way to communicate\" (focus group).