Teachers’ perspective on emergency remote teaching during Covid-19 at tertiary level

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Teachers' perspective on emergency remote teaching during Covid-19 at tertiary level

Danijela KuliC

PhD, Associate Professor, Faculty of Philology, Department of English Language and Literature University of Pristina in Kosovska Mitrovica, Kosovska Mitrovica, Serbia

Anita Jankovic

MA, Teaching assistant, Faculty of Philology, Department of English Language and Literature University of Pristina in Kosovska Mitrovica, Kosovska Mitrovica, Serbia

Abstract

Revising the way we organize the teaching activities is never an easy task even under normal circumstances, and when the state of emergency and the use of digital technology are added to the mix, the situation becomes even more complicated. During this process, it is easy to forget that although the content of teaching remains the same, the ways of delivering that content will change. Accustomed to synchronous, direct communication in a traditional classroom, we are now faced with asynchronous channels and a modular approach to teaching with the help of digital tools that are (un)known to us and which, despite their apparent value, present barriers to teaching and learning for various reasons such as Internet access, digital skills, adequate equipment, and economic and social status. Despite the development of digital technology and the exponential growth of digital applications and tools that have paved the way for online education worldwide in rece nt years, our emergency response to the pandemic indicates the lack of readiness of educational institutions for this type of change. Therefore, the paper examines how university teachers perceive the emergency remote teaching imposed on them from March to September 2020 due to the COVID - 19 pandemic.

The research problem of this study concerns the affective attitudes of the lecturers at the University of Pristina in Kosovska Mitrovica towards emergency remote teaching. Namely, the authors are set with the task of investigating how teachers perceive the new reality and how they have managed to acclimate to emergency remote teaching. For the purposes of this study, three major schools at the University were selected: the Faculty of Philosophy, the Faculty of Arts, and the Faculty of Medicine. The three schools represent the bulk of the University academic offer: sciences, humanities, and arts. The data is compiled by means of a survey, while the respondents are selected by the convenience sampling technique. The aim of the study is to present the analysis of the data obtained in order to develop a future training programme for university lecturers in principles and practices of the distance education and to improve the emergency response of the higher education institutions as a whole.

Keywords: emergency remote teaching; lecturers; higher education; traditional instruction; attitudes; Kosovska Mitrovica.

Анотація

ПЕРСПЕКТИВИ ДИСТАНЦІЙНОГО НАВЧАННЯ У ЗАКЛАДАХ ВИЩОЇОСВІТИ ПІД ЧАС COVID-19

Даніела Куліч

PhD, доцент, філологічний факультет, кафедра англійської мови та літератури Університет Приштини в Косовській Митровіці, м. Косовська Митровица, Сербія

Аніта Янкович

МА, асистент викладача, філологічний факультет, кафедра англійської мови та літератури Університет Приштини в Косовській Митровіці, м. Косовська Митровица, Сербія

Організація процесу навчальної діяльності завжди є складним завданням навіть за звичайних обставин, але все значно ускладнюється під час введення надзвичайного стану, коли до цього додається використання цифрових технологій. У такий період необхідно пам'ятати, що зміст навчання залишається незмінним, але способи його представлення можуть бути інакшими. Зазвичай ми звикли до синхронного прямого спілкування в традиційному класі, але зараз стикаємося з асинхронними каналами та модульним підходом до навчання за допомогою цифрових інструментів, які (не)відомі нам і під час використання яких, незважаючи на їх очевидну значущість, виникають перешкоди в навчальному процесі з різних причин, як-от: доступ до Інтернету, цифрові навички, відповідне обладнання або економічний та соціальний статус. Незважаючи на розвиток цифрових технологій та експоненційне зростання цифрових додатків та інструментів, які проклали шлях до онлайн освіти в усьому світі за останні роки, вимушене швидке реагування під час пандемії виявило недостатню готовність навчальних закладів до такого типу змін. У статті досліджено сприйняття викладачами університетів впровадження екстреного дистанційного навчання у період з березня по вересень 2020 року через пандемію COVID-19.

Тема цього дослідження - вивчення афективного ставлення викладачів Університету Приштини в Косовській Митровіці до екстреного дистанційного навчання, завдання дослідження - сприйняття вчителями нової реальності, шляхи їх пристосування до екстреного дистанційного навчання. До дослідження були залучені студенти трьох основних факультетів університету: філософського, мистецтв і медичного з основними напрямами навчання - природничі, гуманітарні та мистецькі науки. Дані були отримані під час опитування, респонденти відбиралися за допомогою зручної вибіркової техніки. Мета дослідження - представлення аналізу отриманих даних з метою розробки майбутньої програми підготовки викладачів ЗВО, яка враховуватиме принципи, наукові засади та практичний досвід дистанційної освіти для покращення якості реагування вищих навчальних закладів на надзвичайні ситуації в цілому.

Ключові слова: екстрене дистанційне навчання; лектори; вища освіта; традиційне навчання; ставлення; Косовська Митровица.

Introduction

Emergency remote teaching (ERT) is a new term that refers to an ad hoc strategy for online teaching in the emergency conditions, in this case the COVID-19 pandemic, engaging faculty as a matter of urgency in order not to disrupt the teaching processes. Each higher education institution did its best to also engage the IT sector and the staff responsible for maintaining websites and other digital communication services. The variety of platforms used to deliver instruction has never been greater, as higher education institutions have had the autonomy to organize the educational process by urgent procedure. Therefore, ERT “involves the use of fully remote teaching solutions for instruction or education that would otherwise be delivered face-to-face or as blended or hybrid courses and that will return to that format once the crisis or emergency has abated” [1]. In these conditions, the aim is to set up a reliable ad- interim education ecosystem that provides access to the teaching materials and support. Hodges et al. [1] point out that only when ERT is perceived in this manner, “we can start to divorce it from online learning” which is an important distinction for the purposes of this study.

1. The theoretical background

The term `online teaching' was initially accepted as a general term encompassing different means of communication between teachers and students, i.e., the use of various platforms and digital services to enable any manner of interaction to deliver lectures, review students' assignments, conduct formal consultations and discussions, and ensure that the learning/teaching process is undisturbed despite any obstacles. However, faculty were not equipped with the necessary knowledge and skills to operate in the new and challenging conditions, simply because many of them could not distinguish the terms online, blended learning, virtual learning, emergency remote teaching, etc. According to the Cambridge Online Dictionary definition (2021), e-learning is “learning done by studying at home using computers and courses provided on the Internet.” This broad definition was not taken seriously and was always poorly understood. Until recently, many researchers in the field considered the terms online education, distance education, e-learning, online learning, blended learning, computer- based learning, web-based learning, virtual learning, tele-education, cyber-learning, Internet- based learning, distributed learning, etc. to be “sufficiently synonymous” [2, 160]. Although online learning has been the subject of research for decades [3], [4], [5] and various instructional designs have been proposed [6], a large number of faculties in Serbia were still hesitant to teach online courses or offer distance learning to students until the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. In response to the global education crisis, distance learning was introduced into practice, and from this experience we conclude that such teaching is more than simply posting educational content online. It is a complex process that requires careful planning, design, and setting of goals to meet the learning outcomes [18].

On the surface, it appears that we are dealing with distance learning, however, in essence, this is rather a temporary solution to the current problem. In other words, distance education in many segments is fundamentally different from the emergency remote teaching. Recognizing the differences between the two forms of teaching is important for several reasons. First, planning teaching materials and activities under the incorrect assumptions and using them in an inappropriate context will make us even more prone to making mistakes along the way [14]. Secondly, once the crisis is over and the teaching process returns to normal, there is a high probability that only the bad practices from the emergency instructional period will be remembered. Consequently, the efforts made over the years to prove the effectiveness of distance education will be devalued. Finally, another shortcoming of the current practice is the “high confidence in a learning process that is only technologically improved” [18, ii].

However, from the beginning of the pandemic to the present day, it has been evident that there is a lack of appropriate instructional design at all levels of education, which is unsettling for both teachers and students. Therefore, the authors intended to map affective attitudes of higher education teachers toward emergency distance education delivered at the tertiary level during the first three months of the COVID-19 pandemic. For the purposes of this study, the authors created a non-standardized questionnaire designed to elicit teachers' attitudes and perceptions of the benefits and drawbacks of ERT. Although there was no appropriate instructional design, stipulated by the Serbian Ministry of Education, Science, and Technological Advancement, the teachers at the University of Pristina in Kosovska Mitrovica (in further text referred to as UPKM), attempted to carry out their day-to-day operations in every possible way.

According to Branch and Dousay [6, 15], instructional design needs to “result in instruction that is both effective and appealing to student”, moreover, it should “convey guid ing principles for analyzing, producing, and revising intentional learning contexts”. Whether or not university-level faculty have succeeded in drawing some prudent conclusions and discovering tools for analyzing, creating, and reinforcing emergency learning outcomes will become apparent in the near future when a large body of research is assembled. This paper provides at least some insight into the attitudes of teachers in the first phase of ERT and how they perceived themselves at that time. It would be beneficial if similar types of research were conducted at different stages, including teachers from both national and international universities. Only with a large database could guidelines for future emergency response and distance education practice be established. Finally, “exploring the difference between ERT, blended teaching, and online teaching may help scholars and teacher educators identify professional learning topics that can improve teachers' feelings of preparedness for teaching in any situation moving forward”, according to Trust and Whalen [7, 194].

2. Research methods

The survey on emergency remote teaching was conducted from June to October 2020 at the UPKM among university teachers of different academic titles. The questionnaire contains 20 questions, of which two questions are open-ended and 18 are closed-ended questions. A larger part of the sample completed the printed questionnaire, while some respondents completed an online questionnaire distributed via Google Forms. To analyze the data, the authors used descriptive statistics for the quantitative items (closed-ended questions), while the answers to two open-ended questions were processed by the means of thematic analysis. This survey represents a cross-sectional study relating to teachers' affective attitudes.

2.1 The aim of the study

The aim of the study is to determine the affective attitudes of university teachers towards emergency remote teaching at the UPKM, i.e., to examine and evaluate: 1) their readiness to accept novelty; 2) their affective state before, during, and after some form of online teaching; 3) comparison of traditional to emergency remote teaching from their point of view. As the debate about the benefits and drawbacks of the emergency remote teaching will continue in the future, the authors of this paper were interested in finding out, firstly, whether teachers felt ready to embrace new challenges and, secondly, how they felt during the first wave of the emergency. The goal of the study is to present the analysis of the collated results of the survey to inform the design of the future teacher training programme on the principles and practices of distance education and improve the overall emergency response of higher education institutions.

2.2 Hypotheses

Given all the arguments, the authors propose the following hypotheses:

1. Teachers were more engaged in lesson preparation and review of students' assignments, in terms of time, compared to traditional teaching.

2. Teachers showed higher levels of anxiety during the ERT compared to traditional teaching conditions.

3. Traditional teaching is more efficient and beneficial to both students and teachers, compared to the ERT model.

2.3Participants

The survey included (N=56) university lecturers of different academic levels, ranging from assistant to full time professors working at the Faculty of Philosophy, the Faculty of Arts, and the Faculty of Medicine in Kosovska Mitrovica. All three schools are integrative parts of the UPKM. The sample (N=56) shows an almost equal gender distribution (Graph 1), but a stronger tendency towards the position of assistant professor in the academic rank distribution (Graph 2).

Graph 1. Gender of the respondents

Graph 2. Academic title and affiliation of the respondents

The distribution of affiliation tips toward the Faculty of Philosophy (46.4%), while the Faculty of Medicine and the Faculty of Arts are about equally represented (30.3% and 23.3% respectively). The mean value for the respondents' age is 40 (age ranging from 2 4 to 65). The convenience sampling technique was used for data collection due to time and cost constraints. This means that all faculty members who were readily available were included in this study. The authors acknowledge that this technique has low generalizability.

3.The results

To test the research hypotheses, authors selected and grouped specific respondents' answers that were analysed according to targeted questions. The following issues are taken into consideration: 1) means of instruction delivery; 2) teachers' engagement and workload during ERT; 3) preparation time and assignment review; 4) ways of delivering feedback to students' assignment; 5) teachers' affective attitudes (level of satisfaction with ERT); and 6) collated benefits and drawbacks of ERT. In the remainder of the text, the results on all the mentioned issues are analysed and presented using appropriate graphs, tables, and verbal interpretations.

3.1 Means of instruction delivery

Firstly, the authors were interested in mapping all the different channels used to deliver the instruction. As shown in Graph 3, the delivery modes were very diverse as the ERT guidelines did not provide specific details on the process but relied on the teachers' personal preferences and available tools. The highest utility rates were recorded for student services (49.1%) which acted as an intermediary between teachers and students, and iTeacher(43.3%), a native digital management and communication platform. Both modes offer one-way communication only--from teachers to students. They are followed by texting apps such as Viberor WhatsApp(36.4%) and e-mail services (34.1%), which offer limited interactivity. Finally, at the bottom of the scale are learning management platforms such asMoodle(30.3%), Google Classroom(15.9%), and PB Works(5.9%). Although these platforms are designed for online learning, they were not the preferred mode of delivery. The large increase in the use of Moodlecan be explained by the fact that the Faculty of Medicine hosts its own software.

Graph 3. Means of delivery

3.2 Teachers engagement and workload during ERT

One of the aims of the study was to evaluate teachers' affective attitudes before, during, and after some form of online teaching in which they were involved. Primarily, the authors ofthis study focused on teachers' perceived engagement and workload during ERT (Graph 4). When asked how engaged they were, the solid majority (92.3%) reported increased engagement and workload, with half of them opting for absolute preoccupation with ERT.

Graph 4. Teachers ' engagement and workload during ERT

3.3 Preparation time and assignment review

In surveying the teachers' previous familiarity with any form of e-learning, 53.8% reported having no practical experience, which in part explains the additional time spent preparing the teaching materials and activities and reviewing student assignments (Table 1). While the majority reported similar time needed for the lesson preparation in both modes of delivery, a higher percentage were found to spend more than a week preparing for online teaching (19.2%) than in face-to-face teaching (4%). In terms of reviewing assignments in online mode, responses were relatively evenly distributed, while the responses in face-to-face teaching were more diverse. Namely, more than half of the respondents (67%) stated they needed only a few hours for the review, while as little as 1.6% expressed they needed more than a week for it.

Table 1Preparation time and assignment review

Regarding feedback on student assignments, the authors observed an uneven distribution in the delivery of feedback (Graph 5). While 61.5% of respondents reported that they gave feedback to individual students via email, one-third did so in a group message summarising the review of assignments. Finally, 3.8% reported they gave no feedback at all.

Graph 5. Ways of delivering feedback to students ' assignments

3.5 Teachers' affective attitudes (level of satisfaction with ERT)

In assessing teachers' affective attitudes during the transition to ERT, the authors asked them how they felt when they received instructions from the university management to move their classes online. The authors found that a small percentage of respondents (7.7%) were satisfied with online delivery because it suited them better. One third of participants stated they felt anxious and apprehensive. Finally, a little over half of the participants indicated that they felt relaxed as they already had some experience with online teaching. Additionally, after the end of the semester, the authors asked participants to rate their satisfaction with ERT (Graph 6). On a scale from very low to very high satisfaction, around 8% of the respondents expressed very low or low satisfaction. Slightly less than 40 percent of the respondents expressed mild satisfaction with the new teaching process. The highest peak was observed in the high satisfaction category (42.3%) and only 11.5% expressed being very highly satisfied with their ERT experience.

Graph 6. Levels of satisfaction

3.6 Collated benefits and drawbacks of ERT

The mixed feelings about ERT are further expressed in the next section of the survey, which deals with the perceived benefits and drawbacks of the ERT process. By means of the thematic analysis, the authors of the paper compiled the responses and found that the benefits slightly outweigh the drawbacks (Table 2). The most prominent benefits relate to the accessibility and diversity of the teaching materials, as multimedia materials and digital tools were increasingly used. Consequently, respondents noted that ERT provided more opportunities for autonomous student work and independent research. On the other hand, the results also revealed some drawbacks. Primarily, the teachers relied on free materials and tools which are usually severely limiting. Secondly, students' perceived autonomy increased instances of plagiarism and academic dishonesty. Furthermore, ERT uncovered students' lack of technical requirements and low levels of digital literacy.

Table 2Collated benefits and drawbacks of ERT reported by the respondents

This study set out with the aim of assessing the affective attitudes of the teachers at the UPKM, who were presented with the challenge of moving their teaching practice fully online in response to the emergency situation back in March of 2020. The assumption was that the participants would be more engaged in lesson preparation and assignment review, and that consequently, they would exhibit higher levels of anxiety during ERT and therefore find the traditional learning model more beneficial. According to Rush et al. [8], emergency remote teaching can be fully functional and efficient only through thoughtful planning and development before a disaster strikes. However, the COVID-19 emergency response met us unprepared; hence, the results of this study show a diversity of practices, conflicting attitudes, and a close tie on the discussion of benefits and drawbacks of ERT.

The findings of the current study relating to the modes of delivery are consistent with those of Ferri et al. [9], who outlined one of the technological challenges of ERT to be teachers' lack of skills in using technology and them reverting to the things they already know and feel confident in using [10], such as using the student services as intermediaries or iTeacher, a native digital management and communication platform, then texting apps such as Viber or WhatsApp and e-mail services, although they allow for limited interactivity or even just a one-way communication. On the other hand, the learning management systems such as Moodle, PB Works, or Google Classroom, which offer fully functional virtual learning environments, are only a side note on the list of the delivery modes.

The present findings on the additional workload and time required seem to be consistent with other studies which report that online courses require more instructional time than traditional courses [10], [11]. This refers to two aspects of ERT--the need to redesign course materials and the assessment of student work. Many instructors reported working with inadequate equipment, resulting in wasted time and frustration [12], [13]. Furthermore, the lack of student feedback is also reported by Ferri et al. [9] as one of the pedagogical challenges of ERT. Finally, in the lessons they learned during COVID-19 emergency remote learning, Vollbrecht et al. [14, 723] underline a simple truth “everything takes longer online”.

The authors' earlier observations on teacher satisfaction with ERT, which indicated a peak in the high and very high satisfaction categories, mirror those of the previous studies that have examined the same issue. Salayo et al. [15] reported a general satisfaction of teachers with ERT, as well as Rodriguez-Muniz et al. [10] who relayed that over 80% of their respondents said they were satisfied or very satisfied. Though the findings of this research show a lower satisfaction rate among the lecturers, it is still a valid conclusion that despite all the difficulties and perceived drawbacks, the teaching staff had a positive teaching experience in an emergency situation and managed to minimize the disruption to the learning process.

There are similarities between the perceived benefits and drawbacks expressed by the respondents in this study and those described by Rodriguez-Muniz et al. [10], Alvarez [16], Ferri et al. [9], and Salayo et al. [15]. The most prominent and frequent benefits are those relating to the easily accessible teaching materials as well as the redesigned teaching activities that promote student autonomy, which align with the findings of Rodriguez-Muniz et al. [10], who observed an increase in the use of open access resources. However, one of the major complaints of the respondents is that the use of free digital tools and materials severely limits their teaching practice. This is also reported by Toquero [13] and Moralista & Oducado [12], who underlined the importance of incorporating platforms and tools that do not require longterm payment but offer full functionalities. In contrast to earlier findings on student autonomy and their individual work, no evidence of increased student plagiarism was found in the reviewed studies.

The results of this study corroborate the findings of a great deal of the previous work in the field regarding communication and interaction in the ERT settings. Toquero [13] acknowledged that face-to-face interaction was important for building interpersonal relationships, which technology cannot replace, as repeatedly reported by the respondents. In addition, this study cited low interaction as a drawback of the ERT model, which appears to be consistent with other studies. [16], [15]. With this in mind, the authors completely agree with Major [17, 2170], who provided evidence that “instructors need to maintain substantial involvement in online courses; furthermore, they need to determine how to build a new persona as well as relationships with students in these remote environments”.

Although it is important to consider the potential bias in these findings, the fact remains that despite negative or positive results of the ERT model, the educational systems worldwide are “left with no choice but to experience and accept the great and rapid changes in adopting the concepts of emergency remote education” [18, 2]. Trust and Whalen [7] recommended several ways to improve on the emergency response in education:

- infuse the curriculum with high quality and quantity technology experiences;

- provide teachers with distance teaching competencies;

- encourage educators to cultivate digitally-enhanced professional learning networks.

Conclusions and prospects for further research

This study was undertaken to map teachers' affective attitudes and perceived benefits and drawbacks of the ERT model at the UPKM in order to evaluate teachers' transitioning to the online teaching in an emergency situation and inform the academic community on teachers' attitudes and readiness to accept online learning as a future teaching model. The authors of the paper posited that teachers' workload increased, that they showed higher levels of anxiety during ERT compared to traditional classroom circumstances and believe that the traditional learning model is more efficient and beneficial, for both students and teachers. These findings suggest that our first hypothesis was correct: teachers spent more time on lesson preparation and assignment review than they would in the face-to-face teaching. One of the more significant findings to emerge from this study is that over half of the respondents stated that they were satisfied with their ERT experience, though in partial accordance with the second hypothesis the results indicate that the participants felt anxious and unsure of themselves. Finally, contrary to our third hypothesis, the thematic analysis uncovered a balance in the perceived benefits and drawbacks of the ERT model. The most obvious finding to emerge from this study is that technology is a poor substitute for immediate communication and interaction in the teaching and learning process.

These findings enhanced the authors' understanding of the emergency response of the teaching staff at the UPKM. They have also confirmed which areas need improvement, such as teacher training and continual support, adequate technological equipment, and psychosocial support for both students and teachers in times of crisis. Taken together, these findings suggest a positive attitude, some digital grounding, and a willingness on the part of teachers to minimize the disruption to the learning process, which makes up a solid foundation to build upon. The faculty must not only learn new skills they need to deliver their instruction, but they must also gain a clear grasp of their newly defined roles and responsibilities, as well as receive training in new instructional techniques. They must also be taught how technology influences and is affected by their teaching, while given enough time to absorb and integrate this new knowledge. As already mentioned in the discussion, the new teacher training programme needs to be:

- infused with technology experiences;

- competency-based;

- based on an understanding of teachers' needs and of their work environments;

- a simulation of the real teaching experiences;

- based on information related to student learning experience and their attitudes.

Finally, a number of important limitations need to be considered here. First and foremost,

the generalizability of these results is subject to certain limitations due to sampling technique and the sample size. Secondly, the current research was not specifically designed to evaluate different influencing factors such as age, gender, or years of teaching experience of the respondents. Finally, these findings are limited by the use of a cross-sectional design. This research has thrown up many questions in need of further investigation, therefore, the authors firstly need to correlate these findings to the demographics of the respondents to see if a different picture emerges. Secondly, teacher perspectives need to be compared to the student satisfaction survey for a more detailed insight into the effectiveness of the ERT model.

References (translated and transliterated)

distance learning university teacher

[1] C. B. Hodges, S. Moore, B. B. Lockee, T. Trust, and M. A. Bond, “The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning,” 2020.

[2] A. Sun and X. Chen, “Online education and its effective practice: A research review.,” Journal of Information Technology Education, vol. 15, 2016.

[3] D. R. Garrison, T. Anderson, and W. Archer, “Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education,” American Journal of distance education, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 7-23, 2001.

[4] D. R. Garrison and J. B. Arbaugh, “Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions,” The Internet and higher education, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 157-172, 2007.

[5] F. Ke, “Examining online teaching, cognitive, and social presence for adult students,” Computers & Education, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 808-820, 2010.

[6] R. M. Branch and T. A. Dousay, “Survey of instructional design models. Association for Educational Communications & Technology,” Indiana: AECT, 2015.

[7] J. Whalen and T. Trust, “Should teachers be trained in emergency remote teaching? Lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic,” Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 189-199, 2020.

[8] S. Craig Rush, A. Partridge, and J. Wheeler, “Implementing emergency onlin e schools on the fly as a means of responding to school closures after disaster strikes,” Journal of Educational Technology Systems, vol. 45, no. 2,

pp. 188-201, 2016.

[9] F. Ferri, P. Grifoni, and T. Guzzo, “Online learning and emergency remote teaching: Oppo rtunities and challenges in emergency situations,” Societies, vol. 10, no. 4, p. 86, 2020.

[10] L. J. Rodriguez-Muniz, D. Buron, A. Aguilar-Gonzalez, and L. Muniz-Rodriguez, “Secondary Mathematics Teachers' Perception of Their Readiness for Emergency Remote Tea ching during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case Study,” Education Sciences, vol. 11, no. 5, p. 228, 2021.

[11] M. A. Gabriel and K. J. Kaufield, “Reciprocal mentorship: An effective support for online instructors,” Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 311-327, 2008.

[12] R. Moralista and R. M. Oducado, “Faculty perception toward online education in higher education during the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic,” Available at SSRN 3636438, 2020.

[13] C. M. Toquero, “Emergency remote education experiment amid COVID-19 pandemic,” IJERI: International Journal of Educational Research and Innovation, no. 15, pp. 162-176, 2021.

[14] P. J. Vollbrecht, K. A. Porter-Stransky, and W. L. Lackey-Cornelison, “Lessons learned while creating an effective emergency remote learning environment for students during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Advances in physiology education, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 722-725, 2020.

[15] J. Salayo, J. E. Fesalbon, L. C. Valerio, and R. A. Litao, “Engagement and Satisfaction of Senior High School Teachers and Students during the Emergency Remote Teaching (ERT),” Studies in Humanities and Education, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 19-34, 2021.

[16] A. V. Alvarez Jr, “The phenomenon of learning at a distance through emergency remote teaching amidst the pandemic crisis.,” Asian Journal ofDistance Education, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 144-153, 2020.

[17] C. Major, “Do virtual professors dream of electric students? University faculty experiences with on line distance education,” Teachers College Record, vol. 112, no. 8, pp. 2154-2208, 2010.

[18] A. Bozkurt and R. C. Sharma, “Emergency remote teaching in a time of global crisis due to Corona Virus pandemic,” Asian Journal ofDistance Education, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. i-vi, 2020.

Размещено на Allbest.ru