Investigating Learners’ Teaching Format Preferences during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Empirical Investigation on an Emerging Market
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Hypothesis and Conceptual Model Development
2.1. The Social Learning Theory and the Social Cognitive Learning Theory
2.2. Generating Learners’ Experience during the COVID-19 Pandemic
2.3. Teaching Staff Skills and the Teaching-Learning Process
2.4. Challenges Encountered While Using E-Learning and Video Streaming Platforms
3. Research Methodology
3.1. Research Design, Sampling, and Data Collection
3.2. The Evaluation of the Measurement Models
3.3. The Evaluation of the Structural Models
4. Results and Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Andronie, M.; Lăzăroiu, G.; Ștefănescu, R.; Ionescu, L.; Cocoșatu, M. Neuromanagement Decision-Making and Cognitive Algorithmic Processes in the Technological Adoption of Mobile Commerce Apps. Oeconomia Copernic. 2021, 12, 863–888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Durana, P.; Krulicky, T.; Taylor, E. Working in the Metaverse: Virtual Recruitment, Cognitive Analytics Management, and Immersive Visualization Systems. Psychosociolog. Issues Hum. Resour. Manag. 2022, 10, 135–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zvarikova, K.; Cug, J.; Hamilton, S. Virtual Human Resource Management in the Metaverse: Immersive Work Environments, Data Visualization Tools and Algorithms, and Behavioral Analytics. Psychosociolog. Issues Hum. Resour. Manag. 2022, 10, 7–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Konkin, A.; Dronova, S.; Tretyakova, G.; Eduardovich Bermudez-Alekina, A.; Kotenko, V. Prospects of using innovations in post-pandemic higher education. SHS Web Conf. 2021, 127, 01001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prasetyo, A.; Irvan, S.; Atmam, A. Learning Innovations in Physical Education, Sports, and Health During the Covid-19 Pandemic. Indones. J. Res. Educ. Rev. 2022, 1, 269–277. Available online: https://etdci.org/journal/ijrer/article/view/280 (accessed on 10 July 2022).
- Garcia-Morales, V.; Garrido-Moreno, A.; Martin-Rojas, R. The Transformation of Higher Education After the COVID Disruption: Emerging Challenges in an Online Learning Scenario. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 616059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pocol, C.B.; Stanca, L.; Dabija, D.-C.; Pop, I.D.; Mișcoiu, S. Knowledge Co-creation and Sustainable Education in the Labor Market-Driven University–Business Environment. Front. Environ. Sci. 2022, 10, 781075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reimers, F.; Marmolejo, F. Conclusions: What Innovations Resulted from University–School Collaborations During the COVID-19 Pandemic? In University and School Collaboration in Pandemic; Reimers, F., Marmolejo, F., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 333–357. Available online: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-82159-3_22 (accessed on 10 July 2022).
- Research and Markets. Online Education Market Study 2019. 2019. Available online: https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/12/17/1961785/0/en/Online-Education-Market-Study-2019-World-Market-Projected-to-Reach-350-Billion-by-2025-Dominated-by-the-United-States-and-China.html (accessed on 7 August 2022).
- Blake, R. Metaverse Technologies in the Virtual Economy: Deep Learning Computer Vision Algorithms, Blockchain-based Digital Assets, and Immersive Shared Worlds. Smart Gov. 2022, 1, 35–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kliestik, T.; Novak, A.; Lăzăroiu, G. Live Shopping in the Metaverse: Visual and Spatial Analytics, Cognitive Artificial Intelligence Techniques and Algorithms, and Immersive Digital Simulations. Linguist. Philos. Investig. 2022, 21, 187–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lăzăroiu, G. Besley on Foucault’s Discourse of Education. Educ. Philos. Theory 2013, 45, 821–832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Birtus, M.; Lăzăroiu, G. The Neurobehavioral Economics of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Consumer Cognition, Perception, Sentiment, Choice, and Decision-Making. Anal. Metaphys. 2021, 20, 89–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nica, E.; Kliestik, T.; Valaskova, K.; Sabie, O.-M. The Economics of the Metaverse: Immersive Virtual Technologies, Consumer Digital Engagement, and Augmented Reality Shopping Experience. Smart Gov. 2022, 1, 21–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valaskova, K.; Machova, V.; Lewis, E. Virtual Marketplace Dynamics Data, Spatial Analytics, and Customer Engagement Tools in a Real-Time Interoperable Decentralized Metaverse. Linguist. Philos. Investig. 2022, 21, 105–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bandura, A. Social Learning Theory; Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1977. [Google Scholar]
- Bandura, A. The Evolution of Social Cognitive Theory. In Great Minds in Management; Smith, K.G., Hitt, M.A., Eds.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2005; pp. 9–35. [Google Scholar]
- Seal, C.; Boyatziz, R.; Bailey, J. Fostering Emotional and Social Intelligence in Organizations. Organ. Manag. J. 2006, 3, 190–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McLeod, S. Albert Bandura’s Social Learning Theory. Simply Psychology 2016. Available online: https://www.simplypsychology.org/bandura.html (accessed on 7 August 2022).
- Lăzăroiu, G. Is There an Absence of Capability in Sustainable Development in Universities? Educ. Philos. Theory 2017, 49, 1305–1308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nica, E.; Poliak, M.; Popescu, G.H.; Pârvu, I.-A. Decision Intelligence and Modeling, Multisensory Customer Experiences, and Socially Interconnected Virtual Services across the Metaverse Ecosystem. Linguist. Philos. Investig. 2022, 21, 137–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Popescu, G.H.; Ciurlău, C.F.; Stan, C.I.; Băcănoiu (Văduva), C.; Tănase (Veisa), A. Virtual Workplaces in the Metaverse: Immersive Remote Collaboration Tools, Behavioral Predictive Analytics, and Extended Reality Technologies. Psychosociolog. Issues Hum. Resour. Manag. 2022, 10, 21–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nabavi, R.T. Bandura’s Social Learning Theory & Social Cognitive Learning Theory. 2012. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267750204_Bandura’s_Social_Learning_Theory_Social_Cognitive_Learning_Theory (accessed on 7 August 2022).
- Stein, M. Five Years: Opening the School Door in Encounters with Children. In Encounters with Children, Pediatric Behavior and Development, 4th ed.; Dixon, S.D., Stein, M.T., Eds.; Elsevier, Mosby: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2006; pp. 456–475. [Google Scholar]
- Tekkol, A.; Demirel, M. An Investigation of Self-Directed Learning Skills of Undergraduate Students. Front. Psychol. 2018, 9, 2324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boyer, N.R.; Usinger, P. Tracking pathways to success: Triangulating Learning success factors. Int. J. Self-Dir. Learn. 2015, 12, 22–48. [Google Scholar]
- Alkan, S.H.; Priestley, M. Teacher mediation of curriculum making: The role of reflexivity. J. Curric. Stud. 2019, 51, 737–754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marinoni, G.; Van’t Land, H.; Jensen, T. The Impact of COVID-19 on Higher Education around the World; IAU Global Survey Report; International Association of Universities: Paris, France, 2020; Available online: https://www.iau-aiu.net/IMG/pdf/iau_covid19_and_he_survey_report_final_may_2020.pdf (accessed on 7 July 2022).
- Rapanta, C.; Botturi, L.; Goodyear, P.; Guardia, L.; Koole, M. Online University Teaching During and After the COVID-19 Crisis: Refocusing Teacher Presence and Learning Activity. Postdigit. Sci. Educ. 2020, 2, 923–945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNESCO. Education in Time of COVID-19. 2020. Available online: https://repositorio.cepal.org/bitstream/handle/11362/45905/1/S2000509_en.pdf (accessed on 1 June 2022).
- UNESCO. National Response to COVID-19 of Universities. 2022. Available online: https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse/nationalresponses (accessed on 9 July 2022).
- Zheng, M.; Bender, D.; Lyon, C. Online learning during COVID-19 produced equivalent or better student course performance as compared with prepandemic: Empirical evidence from a school-wide comparative study. BMC Med. Health 2021, 21, 495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pelău, C.; Bena, I.; Vlădoi, A.D.; Dabija, D.C.; Fufezan, M. The Quality of Knowledge Flows and its Impact on the Intellectual Capital Development of a University. In Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Intellectual Capital, Nicosia, Cyprus, 18–19 April 2011; Turner, G., Minnone, C., Eds.; pp. 322–327. [Google Scholar]
- Paul, J.; Jefferson, F. A Comparative Analysis of Student Performance in an Online vs. Face-to-Face. Front. Comput. Sci. 2019, 1, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McNaught, C. Using narrative to understand the convergence of distance and campus-based learning during the time of SARS in Hong Kong. Educ. Media Int. 2004, 41, 183–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mackey, J.; Gilmore, F.; Dabner, N.; Breeze, D.; Buckley, P. Blended learning for academic resilience in times of disaster or crisis. Merlot J. Online Learn. Teach. 2012, 8, 122–135. [Google Scholar]
- Czerniewicz, L.; Trotter, H.; Haupt, G. Online teaching in response to student protests and campus shutdowns: Academics’ perspectives. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 2019, 16, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Masalimova, A.R.; Ryazanova, E.L.; Tararina, L.I.; Sokolova, E.G.; Ikrennikova, Y.B.; Efimushkina, S.V.; Shulga, T.I. Distance learning hybrid format for university students in post-pandemic perspective: Collaborative technologies aspect. Cypriot J. Educ. Sci. 2021, 16, 389–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sangster, A.; Stoner, G.; Flood, B. Insights into accounting education in a COVID-19 world. Account. Educ. 2020, 29, 431–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaka, C. Higher education institutions and the use of online instruction and online tools and resources during the COVID-19 outbreak—An online review of selected U.S. and SA’s universities. Res. Sq. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Di Pietro, G.; Biagi, F.; Costa, P.; Karpiński, Z.; Mazza, J. The Likely Impact of COVID-19 on Education: Reflections Based on the Existing Literature and International Datasets; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klapproth, F.; Federkeil, L.; Jungmann, T. Teachers’ experiences of stress and their coping strategies during COVID-19 induced distance teaching. J. Pedagog. Res. 2020, 4, 444–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oducado, R.M.; Rabacal, J.; Moralista, R.; Tamdang, K. Perceived stress due COVID-19 pandemic among employed professional teachers. Int. J. Edu. Res. Innov. 2020, 15, 305–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rubilar Vargas, N.; Oros, L.B. Stress and Burnout in Teachers During Times of Pandemic. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 756007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wei, S.; He, Y.; Zhou, W.; Popp, J.; Oláh, J. Death Reflection and Employee Work Behavior in the COVID-19 New Normal Time: The Role of Duty Orientation and Work Orientation. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Minihan, E.; Adamis, D.; Dunleavy, M.; Martin, A.; Gavin, B.; McNicholas, F. COVID-19 related occupationa stress in teachers in Ireland. Int. J. Educ. Res. Open 2022, 3, 100114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Zhao, L.; Su, Y.-S. The Impact of Teacher Competence in Online Teaching on Perceived Online Learning Outcomes during the COVID-19 Outbreak: A Moderated-Mediation Model of Teacher Resilience and Age. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 6282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Guerriero, S. (Ed.) Pedagogical Knowledge and the Changing Nature of the Teaching Profession; OECD: Pairs, France, 2017; Available online: https://www.oecd.org/education/pedagogical-knowledge-and-the-changing-nature-of-the-teaching-profession-9789264270695-en.htm (accessed on 7 July 2022).
- Vergara-Rodríguez, D.; Antón-Sancho, Á.; Fernández-Arias, P. Variables Influencing Professors’ Adaptation to Digital Learning Environments during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 3732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coman, C.; Țîru, L.G.; Meseșan-Schmitz, L.; Stanciu, C.; Bularca, M.C. Online Teaching and Learning in Higher Education during the Coronavirus Pandemic: Students’ Perspective. Sustainability 2020, 12, 10367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Biwer, F.; Wiradhany, W.; Egbrink, M.; Hospers, H.; Wasenitz, S.; Jansen, W.; de Bruin, A. Changes and Adaptations: How University Students Self-Regulate Their Online Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 642593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Butnaru, G.I.; Niță, V.; Anichiti, A.; Brînză, G. The Effectiveness of Online Education during COVID-19 Pandemic—A Comparative Analysis between the Perceptions of Academic Students and High School Students from Romania. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Myyry, L.; Kallunki, V.; Katajavuori, N.; Repo, S.; Tuononen, T.; Anttila, H.; Kinnunen, P.; Haarala-Muhonen, A.; Pyörälä, E. COVID-19 Accelerating Academic Teachers’ Digital Competence in Distance Teaching. Front. Educ. 2022, 7, 770094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Toto, G.A.; Limone, P. Motivation, Stress and Impact of Online Teaching on Italian Teachers during COVID-19. Computers 2021, 10, 75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Babbar, M.; Gupta, I.T. Response of educational institutions to COVID-19 pandemic: An inter-country comparison. Policy Futures Educ. 2022, 20, 469–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Budur, T.; Demir, A.; Cura, F. University Readiness to Online Education during COVID-19 Pandemic. Int. J. Soc. Sci. Educ. Stud. 2021, 8, 180–200. [Google Scholar]
- Rangel-Pérez, C.; Gato-Bermúdez, M.-J.; Musicco-Nombela, D.; Ruiz-Alberdi, C. The Massive Implementation of ICT in Universities and Its Implications for Ensuring SDG 4: Challenges and Difficulties for Professors. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, S. On Digital and Literacy Education of European Universities during the Epidemic Period. SHS Web Conf. 2022, 140, 01050. Available online: https://www.shs-conferences.org/articles/shsconf/pdf/2022/10/shsconf_iteme2022_01050.pdf (accessed on 8 August 2022). [CrossRef]
- Albrahim, F. Online Teaching Skills and Competencies. In TOJET Turk. Online J. Educ. Technol.; 2020; 19, pp. 9–20. Available online: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1239983.pdf (accessed on 7 July 2022).
- Simuth, J.; Sarmany-Schuller, I. Principles for E-pedagogy. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 46, 4454–4456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shah, R.K. Concepts of Learner Centred Teaching. Shanlax Int. J. Educ. 2020, 8, 45–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wea, N.; Kuki, A. Students’ Perceptions of Using Microsoft Teams Application in Online Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2021, 1842, 012016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aguirre, T.; Aperribai, L.; Cortabarría, L.; Verche, E.; Borges, Á. Challenges for Teachers’ and Students’ Digital Abilities: A Mixed Methods Design Study. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gopal, R.; Singh, V.; Aggarwal, A. Impact of online classes on the satisfaction and performance of students during the pandemic period of COVID 19. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2021, 29, 6923–6947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rajabalee, Y.B.; Santally, M.I. Learner satisfaction, engagement and performances in an online module: Implications for institutional e-learning policy. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2021, 26, 2623–2656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sobaih, A.E.E.; Salem, A.E.; Hasanein, A.M.; Elnasr, A.E.A. Responses to COVID-19 in Higher Education: Students’ Learning Experience Using Microsoft Teams versus Social Network Sites. Sustainability 2021, 13, 10036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mishra, L.; Gupta, T.; Shree, A. Online teaching-learning in higher education during lockdown period of COVID-19 pandemic. Int. J. Educ. Res. Open 2021, 1, 100012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alshurideh, M.T.; Al Kurdi, B.; AlHamad, A.Q.; Salloum, S.A.; Alkurdi, S.; Dehghan, A.; Abuhashesh, M.; Masa’deh, R. Factors Affecting the Use of Smart Mobile Examination Platforms by Universities’ Postgraduate Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Empirical Study. Informatics 2021, 8, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nguyen, H.U.N.; Duong, L.N.T. The Challenges of E-learning Through Microsoft Teams for EFL Students at Van Lang University in COVID-19. AsiaCALL Online J. 2021, 12, 18–29. [Google Scholar]
- Yew, E.H.J.; Goh, K. Problem-Based Learning: An Overview of Its Process and Impact on Learning. Health Prof. Educ. 2016, 2, 75–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vătămănescu, M.; Alexandru, V.A.; Mitan, A.; Dabija, D.C. From the Deliberate Managerial Strategy towards International Business Performance: A Psychic Distance vs. Global Mindset Approach. Syst. Res. Behav. Sci. 2020, 37, 374–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vătămănescu, E.M.; Brătianu, C.; Dabija, D.C.; Popa, S. Capitalizing Online Knowledge Networks: From Individual Knowledge Acquisition towards Organizational Achievements. J. Knowl. Manag. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Picciano, A.G. Theories and frameworks for online education: Seeking an integrated model. Online Learn. 2017, 21, 166–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lange, C.; Costley, J. Improving online video lectures: Learning challenges created by media. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 2020, 17, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schön, D.A. The Reflective Practicioner; Routlege: London, UK, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Singh, J.; Steele, K.; Singh, L. Combining the Best of Online and Face-to-Face Learning: Hybrid and Blended Learning Approach for COVID-19, Post Vaccine, & Post-Pandemic World. J. Educ. Technol. Syst. 2021, 50, 140–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EIS. Global Consumer Sentiment Survey Learnings about the Future of Online Education in a Post COVID-19 World. 2022. Available online: https://s35764.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Global-Consumer-Sentiment-Survey-Report_Wave-2_2021.pdf (accessed on 7 July 2022).
- Kugamoorthy, S. Activity based learning: An effective approach for self-regulated learning practices. Educ. Perspect. 2017, 6, 28–41. [Google Scholar]
- Virtanen, P.; Niemi, H.M.; Nevgi, A. Active Learning and Self-Regulation Enhance Student Teachers’ Professional Competences. Aust. J. Teach. Educ. 2017, 42, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alqurashi, E. Self-Efficacy in Online Learning Environments: A Literature Review. Contemp. Issues Educ. Res. 2016, 9, 45–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ismail, A. Empowering your student’s satisfaction with blended learning: A lesson from the Arabian Gulf University distance teaching and training program. Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol. 2018, 8, 81–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Arslan, G. Loneliness, college belongingness, subjective vitality, and psychological adjustment during Coronavirus pandemic: Development of the College Belongingness Questionnaire. J. Posit. Sch. Psychol. 2021, 5, 17–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cairns, D.; França, T. Managing Student Mobility during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Immobility Turn in Internationalized Learning? Societies 2022, 12, 105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ziadat, A.H. Online learning effects on students with learning disabilities: Parents’ perspectives. Cypriot J. Educ. Sci. 2021, 16, 759–776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nemțeanu, M.S.; Dabija, D.C. The influence of internal marketing and job satisfaction on task performance and counterproductive work behaviour in an Emergent Market during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 3670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nemțeanu, M.S.; Dinu, V.; Dabija, D.C. Job Insecurity, job instability and job Satisfaction in the Context of COVID 19 Pandemic. J. Compet. 2021, 13, 65–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nemțeanu, S.M.; Dabija, D.C.; Stanca, L. The Influence of Teleworking on Performance and Employee‘s Counterproductive Behaviour. Amfiteatru Econ. 2021, 23, 601–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gherhes, V.; Stoian, C.E.; Farcasiu, M.A.; Stanici, M. E-Learning vs. Face-To-Face Learning: Analyzing Students’ Preferences and Behaviors. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dhawan, S. Online Learning: A Panacea in the Time of COVID-19 Crisis. J. Educ. Technol. Syst. 2020, 49, 5–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Curelaru, M.; Curelaru, V.; Cristea, M. Students’ Perceptions of Online Learning during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Approach. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muthuprasad, T.; Aiswarya, S.; Aditya, K.S.; Girish, K. Students’ perception and preference for online education in India during COVID-19 pandemic. Soc. Sci. Humanit. Open 2021, 3, 100101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodrigues, A.L.; Cerdeira, L.; Machado-Taylor, M.D.L.; Alves, H. Technological Skills in Higher Education—Different Needs and Different Uses. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guild. Best Global Universities in Romania. 2022. Available online: https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/romania (accessed on 12 August 2022).
- Hair, J.F.; Black, W.C.; Babin, B.J. Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective; Pearson Education: London, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Henseler, J.; Sarstedt, M. Goodness-of-fit indices for partial least squares path modeling. Comput. Stat. 2013, 28, 565–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiménez-Bucarey, C.; Acevedo-Duque, Á.; Müller-Pérez, S.; Aguilar-Gallardo, L.; Mora-Moscoso, M.; Vargas, E.C. Student’s Satisfaction of the Quality of Online Learning in Higher Education: An Empirical Study. Sustainability 2021, 13, 11960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- König, J.; Jäger-Biela, D.J.; Glutsch, N. Adapting to online teaching during COVID-19 school closure: Teacher education and teacher competence effects among early career teachers in Germany. Eur. J. Teach. Educ. 2020, 43, 608–622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- DeCoito, I.; Estaiteyeh, M. Transitioning to Online Teaching During the COVID-10 Pandemic: An exploration of STEM Teachers Views, Successes, and Challenges. J Sci. Educ. Technol. 2022, 31, 340–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lisnani, L.; Putri, R.; Zulkardi, I.; Somakim, I. Designing Moodle features as e-learning for learning mathematics in COVID-19 pandemic. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2020, 1657, 012024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mukhtar, K.; Javed, K.; Arooj, M.; Sethi, A. Advantages, Limitations and Recommendations for online learning during COVID-19 pandemic era. Pak. J. Med. Sci. 2020, 36, S27–S31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Setiawan, A.M.; Munzil, A.; Fitriyah, I.J. Trend of learning management system (LMS) platforms for science education before-after COVID-19 pandemic. AIP Conf. Proc. 2021, 2330, 060005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mihanović, Z.; Batinić, A.B.; Pavičić, J. The Link Between Students’ Satisfaction with Faculty, Overall Students’ Satisfaction with Student Life and Student Performances. Rev. Innov. Compet. 2016, 2, 37–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, N.; Xu, Z.; Skare, M. The research on COVID-19 and economy from 2019 to 2020: Analysis from the perspective of bibliometrics. Oeconomia Copernic. 2021, 12, 217–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mihalca, L.; Ratiu, L.; Brendea, G.; Metz, D.; Dragan, M.; Dobre, F. Exhaustion while teleworking during COVID-19: A moderated-mediation model of role clarity, self-efficacy, and task interdependence. Oeconomia Copernic. 2021, 12, 269–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szostek, D.; Balcerzak, A.P.; Rogalska, E. The impact of personality traits on subjective categories of counterproductive work behaviors in Central European environment. Transform. Bus. Econ. 2022, 21, 163–180. [Google Scholar]
- Van Wart, M.; Ni, A.; Medina, P.; Canelon, J.; Kordrostami, M.; Zhang, J.; Liu, Y. Integrating students’ perspectives about online learning: A hierarchy of factors. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 2020, 17, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chin, W.W. The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. In Methodology for Business and Management. Modern Methods for Business Research; Marcoulides, G.A., Ed.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers: New York, NJ, USA, 1998; pp. 295–336. [Google Scholar]
- Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M.; Hair, J.F. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. In Handbook of Market Research; Homburg, C., Klarmann, M., Vomberg, A., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Proyer, M.; Kremsner, G.; Biewer, G. Good Practice in Inclusive Education: Participatory Reinterpretation of Already Existing Elaborate Classroom Practices Under a UDL Perspective. In Improving Inclusive Education through Universal Design for Learning, Inclusive Learning and Educational Equity; Galkienė, A., Monkevičienė, O., Eds.; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 279–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stewart, W.H. A global crash-course in teaching and learning online: A thematic review of empirical Emergency Remote Teaching (ERT) studies in higher education during Year 1 of COVID-19. Open Prax. 2021, 13, 89–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, M.A.; Vivek; Nabi, M.K.; Khojah, M.; Tahir, M. Students’ Perception towards E-Learning during COVID-19 Pandemic in India: An Empirical Study. Sustainability 2021, 13, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ou, C.; Joyner, D.A.; Goel, A.K. Designing and developing video lessons for online learning: A seven-principle model. Online Learn. 2019, 23, 82–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sadeghi, M.A. Shift from Classroom to Distance Learning: Advantages and Limitations. Int. J. Res. Engl. Educ. 2019, 4, 80–88. Available online: https://ijreeonline.com/article-1-132-en.pdf (accessed on 12 August 2022). [CrossRef]
- Almahasees, Z.; Mohsen, K.; Amin, M.O. Faculty’s and Students’ Perceptions of Online Learning During COVID-19. Front. Educ. 2021, 6, 638470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alfadda, H.A.; Mahd, H.S. Measuring Students’ Use of Zoom Application in Language Course Based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). J. Psycholinguist Res. 2021, 50, 883–900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cartee, J. Strategic Empathy in Virtual Learning and Instruction: A Contemplative Essay About Teacher-Student Rapport During Times of Crisis. In J. Instr. Res.; 2021; 10, pp. 12–29. Available online: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1314158.pdf (accessed on 10 June 2022).
- Zhang, Z. Toward the Role of Teacher Empathy in Students’ Engagement in English Language Classes. Front Psychol. 2022, 2, 880935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- WEF. New Vision for Education: Fostering Social and Emotional Learning through Technology. 2016. Available online: https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_New_Vision_for_Education.pdf (accessed on 4 November 2021).
- Lockee, B.B. Online education in the post-COVID era. Nat. Electron. 2021, 4, 5–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Drouin, M.; Hile, R.E.; Vartanian, L.R.; Webb, J. Student preferences for online lecture formats: Does prior experience matter? Q. Rev. Distance Educ. 2013, 14, 1–21. [Google Scholar]
- Bali, S.; Liu, M.C. Students’ perceptions toward online learning and face-to-face learning courses. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2018, 1108, 012094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mather, A.; Sarkans, M. Student Perceptions of Online and Face-to-Face Learning. Int. J. Curric. Instr. 2018, 10, 61–76. [Google Scholar]
- Gonçalves, S.P.; Sousa, M.J.; Pereira, F.S. Distance Learning Perceptions from Higher Education Students: The Case of Portugal. Educ. Sci. 2020, 10, 374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaisar, M.T.; Chowdhury, S.Y. Foreign language virtual classroom: Anxiety creator or healer? Engl. Lang. Teach. 2020, 13, 130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bakhov, I.; Opolska, N.; Bogus, M.; Anishchenko, V.; Biryukova, Y. Emergency Distance Education in the Conditions of COVID-19 Pandemic: Experience of Ukrainian Universities. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tartavulea, C.V.; Albu, C.N.; Albu, N.; Dieaconescu, R.I.; Petre, S. Online Teaching Practices and the Effectiveness of the Educational Process in the Wake of the COVID-19 Pandemic. Amfiteatru Econ. 2020, 22, 920–936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sârbu, M.A.; Mirea, C.N.; Mihai, M.; Nistoreanu, P.; Dadfar, E. Teachers’ and Professors’ Perception of Telework in Romania. Amfiteatru Econ. 2021, 23, 736–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Item | Measure | Loading |
---|---|---|
Faculty Adaptation Capacity (FAC) adapted after [50,51,96]. | ||
FAC1 | The faculty’s capacity to adapt to the new context and to deliver knowledge in the new context is high | 0.909 |
FAC2 | Students’ satisfaction related to the use of educational platforms is high | 0.911 |
Teaching Staff Abilities (TSA) adapted after [29,50,52,59,89,97,98]. | ||
TSA1 | The teaching staff’s high capacity to adapt to online teaching is important in online education | 0.868 |
TSA2 | The teaching staff developed abilities to set deadlines are important in online education | 0.815 |
TSA3 | The teaching staff’s clarity in designing tasks is important in online education | 0.859 |
TSA4 | The teaching staff developed skills to use a variety of online teaching tools are important in online education | 0.855 |
TSA5 | The teaching staff’s ability to provide feedback and assessments is important in online education | 0.837 |
TSA6 | The teaching staff’s technical skills are important in online education | 0.834 |
TSA7 | The balance between theoretical and practical components in the online teaching process is relevant | 0.852 |
TSA8 | The teaching staff’s ability to arouse attention and to maintain interest is important in online education | 0.812 |
TSA9 | The teaching staff’s ability to support students in the learning process is important in online education | 0.859 |
Video Streaming Platform (VSP) adapted after [66,99,100]. | ||
VSP1 | The most used video streaming platform was Microsoft Teams | 1.000 |
e-Learning Platform (ELP) adapted after [99,100,101] | ||
ELP1 | The most utilized e-learning platform was Moodle | 1.000 |
Teaching-Learning Techniques (TLT) adapted after [65,70,73,74]. | ||
TLT1 | The individual seminar activity generated the greatest efficiency for the learning process | 0.788 |
TLT2 | The critical analysis of some proposed contexts generated the greatest efficiency for the learning process | 0.740 |
TLT3 | Working in teams has generated the greatest efficiency for the learning process | 0.840 |
TLT4 | Video materials have generated the greatest efficiency for the learning process | 0.787 |
TLT5 | Case studies have generated the greatest efficiency for the learning process | 0.807 |
TLT6 | Reflection topics generated the greatest efficiency for the learning process | 0.751 |
Online Teaching Advantage (OTA) adapted after [50,64,65,77,80]. | ||
OTA1 | Access to information available in the virtual environment as a complement to the educational process, an advantage identified in relation to online teaching | 0.895 |
OTA2 | Ability to plan and organize as a complement to the educational process, an advantage identified in relation to online teaching | 0.887 |
OTA3 | Development of skills to use the educational tools available online as a complement to the educational process, an advantage identified in relation to online teaching | 0.866 |
OTA4 | Time efficiency as a complement to the educational process, an advantage identified in relation to online teaching | 0.811 |
OTA5 | Feedback received during the semester as a complement to the educational process, an advantage identified in relation to the online teaching activity | 0.804 |
OTA6 | Improving self-education skills as a complement to the educational process, an advantage identified in relation to online teaching | 0.848 |
Online Teaching Disadvantage (OTD) adapted after [65,76,81,82,102,103,104,105]. | ||
OTD1 | Difficulties regarding the ability to apply and deepen the knowledge acquired during the studies carried out correspond to the disadvantages identified during the development of the online educational activity | 0.871 |
OTD2 | The ability to plan and organize corresponds to the disadvantages identified during the development of online educational activity | 0.733 |
OTD3 | Interaction and communication with colleagues correspond to the disadvantages identified during the online educational activity | 0.723 |
OTD4 | Solving and clarifying inconsistencies corresponds to the disadvantages identified during the online educational activity | 0.821 |
Students preferred teaching form (SPTF) adapted after [106]. | ||
STF1 | To what extent can the decision to continue studies in an online teaching-learning system be negatively influenced? | 1.000 |
Cronbach Alpha | AVE | CR | Con-Struct | ELP | FAC | OTA | OTD | SPTF | TSA | TLT | VSP |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | ELP | 1.000 | |||||||
0.792 | 0.828 | 0.906 | FAC | −0.163 | 0.910 | ||||||
0.924 | 0.727 | 0.941 | OTA | −0.199 | 0.675 | 0.852 | |||||
0.819 | 0.624 | 0.868 | OTD | −0.019 | −0.355 | −0.254 | 0.790 | ||||
1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | SPTF | 0.249 | −0.335 | −0.353 | 0.284 | 1.000 | |||
0.949 | 0.712 | 0.957 | TSA | −0.091 | 0.588 | 0.716 | −0.215 | −0.288 | 0.844 | ||
0.876 | 0.618 | 0.907 | TLT | −0.168 | 0.538 | 0.647 | −0.141 | −0.209 | 0.689 | 0.786 | |
1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | VSP | −0.123 | 0.125 | −0.006 | −0.049 | −0.143 | −0.045 | −0.060 | 1.000 |
Construct | ELP | FAC | OTA | OTD | SPTF | TSA | TLT | VSP |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ELP | ||||||||
FAC | 0.183 | |||||||
OTA | 0.208 | 0.788 | ||||||
OTD | 0.085 | 0.416 | 0.253 | |||||
SPTF | 0.249 | 0.377 | 0.366 | 0.265 | ||||
TSA | 0.098 | 0.675 | 0.761 | 0.210 | 0.295 | |||
TLT | 0.179 | 0.647 | 0.719 | 0.159 | 0.224 | 0.753 | ||
VSP | 0.123 | 0.141 | 0.030 | 0.051 | 0.143 | 0.066 | 0.097 |
Paths | PathCoefficients | Standard Deviation | T-Value | CI 1 | p-Value | Hypotheses |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FAC → TSA | 0.588 | 0.067 | 8.753 | 0.434~0.711 | 0.000 *** | H1-Confirmed |
FAC → ELP | −0.167 | 0.116 | 1.439 | −0.376~0.096 | 0.151 n.s. | H2-Not confirmed |
FAC → VSP | 0.231 | 0.091 | 2.548 | 0.048~0.391 | 0.011 ** | H3-Confirmed |
TSA → ELP | 0.007 | 0.122 | 0.059 | −0.223~0.233 | 0.953 n.s. | H4-Not confirmed |
TSA → VSP | −0.181 | 0.100 | 1.811 | −0.359~0.028 | 0.058 * | H5-Partially confirmed |
TSA → TLT | 0.689 | 0.052 | 13.176 | 0.572~0.780 | 0.000 *** | H6-Confirmed |
TSA → OTA | 0.516 | 0.091 | 5.644 | 0.341~0.687 | 0.000 *** | H7-Confirmed |
TSA → OTD | −0.215 | 0.087 | 2.462 | −0.356~0.015 | 0.014 ** | H8-Partially confirmed |
TLT → OTA | 0.291 | 0.100 | 2.926 | 0.097~0.472 | 0.004 ** | H9-Confirmed |
OTA → SPTF | −0.262 | 0.083 | 3.152 | −0.419~−0.099 | 0.002 ** | H10-Partially confirmed |
OTD → SPTF | 0.216 | 0.064 | 3.352 | 0.057~0.323 | 0.001 *** | H11-Confirmed |
ELP → SPTF | 0.187 | 0.073 | 2.548 | 0.045~0.317 | 0.011 ** | H12-Confirmed |
VSP → SPTF | −0.111 | 0.069 | 1.601 | −0.250~0.026 | 0.110 n.s. | H13-Not confirmed |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Burcă-Voicu, M.I.; Cramarenco, R.E.; Dabija, D.-C. Investigating Learners’ Teaching Format Preferences during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Empirical Investigation on an Emerging Market. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 11563. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191811563
Burcă-Voicu MI, Cramarenco RE, Dabija D-C. Investigating Learners’ Teaching Format Preferences during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Empirical Investigation on an Emerging Market. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(18):11563. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191811563
Chicago/Turabian StyleBurcă-Voicu, Monica Ioana, Romana Emilia Cramarenco, and Dan-Cristian Dabija. 2022. "Investigating Learners’ Teaching Format Preferences during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Empirical Investigation on an Emerging Market" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 18: 11563. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191811563