Emergency Remote Teaching and Social–Emotional Learning: Examining Gender Differences

Abstract

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic entailed a sudden shift to remote learning. Teachers had to adjust instantly to a new reality and acquire new tools for emergency remote teaching. The present research studied the perceptions and stances of teachers following this change. It focused on aspects of personal experience and teachers’ perceptions of the students and the educational relations, and it also examined gender differences. An online questionnaire built to this end addressed different aspects of the switch to emergency remote teaching. The findings reveal a variety of stances and perceptions about the change. The research participants thought that the students faced a need to increase their self-learning. However, they did not sense a significant change in their self-perception and the quality of educational relations. Yet, significant differences emerged between the teachers based on gender. Male teachers reported more difficulty making the switch than their female colleagues. The research shed light on the link between remote teaching and Social–Emotional Learning (SEL). On a practical level, it calls for integrating social–emotional learning components in teacher training frameworks and promoting remote teaching professional skills.

1. Introduction

In March 2020, with the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, Israel’s education system had to switch abruptly and unexpectedly to remote learning. For about a year, most of the teaching and learning (except for special education) occurred remotely to avoid physical contact. The lessons widely leaned on the Zoom platform, as did teacher–student communications. The consequent sharp change had varied implications for the educational processes, particularly the quality of personal experiences and interpersonal connections. Several studies have found a connection between the quality of educational relations and academic achievements, gap narrowing, and the mental well-being of students [1]. Investigating teachers’ experience following the switch to emergency remote teaching promises, therefore, to shed light on reactions and stances that might affect educational relations, teachers’ and students’ well-being, and academic achievements.

The present research studied the teachers’ experiences, focusing on changes in their self-perception and the perceptions of the students following the switch to remote learning. It aimed to discern the effects of this switch on the educators and detect possible differences between teachers based on demographic variants (gender and age) and professional ones (education, length of teaching career, and number of the weekly teaching hours). The present study aimed to examine how teachers experienced the switch to emergency remote teaching, with particular emphasis on the social–emotional aspects of self-perception and student perception. The study also aimed to discern whether any differences exist between male and female teachers in this respect. We focused on the gender variable, as the data available on it are inconclusive. Certain studies maintain that men had a technological advantage e.g., [2,3]. Others, in contrast, claim that men had more difficulty switching to emergency remote teaching, particularly concerning emotional communication e.g., [4]. Furthermore, as Evans [5] notes, within the social–emotional research and discourse, “Gender remains a notable omission” (p. 184), and like others it relates to students’ gender. The effects of teachers’ gender on social and emotional aspects of learning, and more specifically distant learning, remain a mystery.

Our investigation was potentially valuable on two complementary levels: On the theoretical level, scrutinizing the effects of the switch to emergency remote teaching and the differences between men and women helps to advance the understanding of the change complexities and their implications, especially for personal experiences and professional relationships. In practice, such understanding would promote introducing adequate responses to changing needs into the teacher training programs, and making the needed adjustments to the professional development of educators, integrating online pedagogy into the education system.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Online Learning and Emergency Remote Teaching

Remote (or online) learning describes learning processes using online interfaces that allow learners and teachers situated in different places to hold learning sessions [6]. Remote learning leans on two valuable features that have allowed its growing expansion in the past few years. The first regards the newly developed technologies that enable information-sharing and group talks. The resultant second feature allows studying in a defined framework independently of the participants’ geographical location. These two features have developed at an accelerated pace in the past two decades, making online learning platforms available worldwide [7]. Thus, a fundamental change occurred in the educational and academic rules of the game, but no less so in the skills or expertise required to make such learning effective and significant [8]. Various comparative studies on online vs. traditional learning have reached complex conclusions, depending, among other things, on the determined criteria of success. The supporters of remote learning tended to underscore content mastery and understanding, evaluated primarily by tests and pop quizzes. Those supporting traditional learning tended to focus on qualitative perceptions of teachers and students [9]. The effectiveness of the developing remote learning path is, then, controversial.

However, it would be wrong to examine remote teaching between March 2020 and February 2021 by the usual criteria. Given that the switch was abrupt and imposed, it should be regarded as emergency remote teaching, as sometimes required in crises. Such teaching is unplanned and temporary, including activities that would otherwise be conducted face-to-face or in a hybrid format [10]. These are, therefore, two distinct types of teaching and learning that should be evaluated differently [10]. Among other things, the broad context and the decision to switch to emergency remote teaching carry a particular weight. Behind this decision stood various considerations, none of them educational, and preparing for it was practically impossible.

Thus, the switch to emergency remote learning had varied practical implications. They included various educational approaches, from non-teaching (giving the students assignments without clear directions or a defined framework) or applying traditional teaching methods, to remote teaching (knowledge transfer through lectures on an online platform), to using digital teaching applications. The latter combined knowledge transfer, pedagogy, and technical tools to add value to the digital learning experience such as TPACK, see [11]. The question was how to evaluate these emergency teaching and learning processes and by what criteria. Many studies examined the influences of emergency remote teaching on schools’ teachers and curricula [12]. Many other studies focused on the implications of emergency remote teaching on student experience [13].

The present study focuses on the self-experience and interpersonal relations of Israeli teachers within the transition to emergency remote teaching, adopting the social–emotional learning (SEL) approach. Several reasons led to focusing on the social–emotional aspects of remote emergency teaching. They included the conditions that necessitated it, including lockdowns and social distancing; the teaching characteristics of that period with a severe cut in interpersonal interaction between teachers and students and among the students; and the emergent distress agents—loneliness, anxiety, tension, and depression. The examination of these aspects of teaching enables for restructuring the remote learning model to underscore educational relationships and hence support teachers’ and students’ well-being and success. It may also contribute to teachers’ training processes, preparing prospective teachers to future situations of emergency remote teaching and nurturing social–emotional competencies.

2.2. Social–Emotional Learning during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Social–emotional learning is an educational, research-based, and applicative approach, emphasizing the contribution of emotional, interpersonal, and social aspects to a successful educational process. Social–emotional learning “is a process in which students learn and implement a series of social, emotional, behavioral, and character-related skills required to succeed in school, at work, in relationships, and in civil life” [14].

The CASEL model of advancing social and emotional learning focuses on developing the social and emotional skills required to succeed in different social frameworks. According to this highly influential model, social–emotional learning has five derived foci that mark central educational goals: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, social skills, and responsible decision-making—each divided into sub-categories. The context of the educational process, including classroom, school, family, and community, affects these foci. At the center of SEL is the argument that catering to the well-being of students and teachers is a necessary condition for development in various spheres, including improved academic achievements, social and emotional skills, attitudes towards oneself and the school, and decreasing negative behaviors and teacher stress and burnout levels [15]. Numerous studies and several meta-analyses [16,17] have discovered an improvement in these spheres. Moreover, fostering social and emotional skills at younger ages (elementary school) emerged as predicting employment, economic and academic success, and physical health [18]. It was also found that acquiring social and emotional skills may contribute to narrowing academic and social gaps [19,20]. Studies that examined the effect of social–emotional educational interventions have further substantiated this assumption. They found, among other things, a general improvement in academic achievements (mathematics and reading), reported levels of hostility, aggression, and depression, and in the teachers’ evaluation of the students’ academic skills and attentiveness [15,16]. The intervention program was found to be particularly beneficial for students reported to be at risk of dropping out and having behavioral issues, narrowing down their academic lacunae [21].

The switch to emergency remote teaching urged educators and education researchers to explore elements that could generate beneficial social–emotional learning conditions. Among them emerged the need to belong to and connect with a group (class, school) to counterbalance distancing, loneliness, and social separation [22]. The claim was that quality educational connection and being cared for create in the students a sense of security and academic, emotional, and behavioral growth, particularly during emergency remote learning [23]. Dabrowsky [24] noted that teachers’ well-being before, during, and after the pandemic affected their satisfaction and productivity in their work, and no less so impacted their students’ well-being and achievements. She proposed to place relationships and human connections at the center before pedagogy (“people, then pedagogy”, (p. 39))—but what does this mean?

A systematic review of the literature published during the pandemic [25] revealed five central contributors to the advancement of belongingness and connectedness under remote learning conditions. One of them is interaction with the teacher. The others are usability, synchronicity, immediacy, and community. Teacher presence or teacher–student interaction, associated with the teacher’s familiarity and involvement in the learning processes, was found to affect student interaction and engagement with the studying [26]. Relationships lean on the teacher’s characteristics [27], some of which are individual personality traits, and others may spring from various demographic and professional variables. The present study aimed to examine the effect of the latter type of variables on the quality of the connection with the students under emergency remote learning conditions. The underlying assumption was that understanding the factors influencing this connection, including the teachers’ self-perception and perception of the students, could reveal difficulty foci and help identify appropriate solutions to help create a safe learning environment for remote learning.

2.3. Gender Differences, Emergency Remote Teaching and SEL

Many studies examined gender differences in the context of digital learning (and more specifically, during the COVID-19 pandemic); however, most of them focused on students’ gender e.g., [28]. Some studies examined gender differences in teacher-child relationships as reported by teachers and found greater difficulty in creating closeness with boys [29]. However, teachers’ gender differences have been rarely examined. Other studies examined teachers’ gender differences as factors that contribute to both teachers’ and students’ well-being, but their findings are inconclusive [30]. Some studies found female teachers to be advantageous, reporting more positive attitudes towards students [4], creating close connections with students [31], having higher levels of teacher resilience [32], being more ready to offer students distant learning education [33] and having an advantage in various technological skills [34]. However, other studies found female teachers to be disadvantageous, reporting greater anxiety and depressive symptoms [35,36], partially explained by differences in remote teaching readiness [37]. Additionally, others found that male teachers inspire a sense of safety in a technological environment [2,3,38]. These inconclusive data make gender an interesting variable, especially in examining the shift to emergency remote teaching and when focusing on its social and emotional aspects.

2.4. Teachers’ Stands on Social–Emotional Aspects of Emergency Remote Learning

Various studies have examined teachers’ stances regarding the switch to emergency remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Some included aspects of emotional self-experience, such as self-efficacy [39], burnout [40], and compassion fatigue [41]. The studies revealed a decrease in self-efficacy and an increase in burnout and compassion fatigue, indicating greater emotional difficulty following the switch to emergency remote learning. These findings are highly significant for policy-making and finding ways to alleviate the problems and enhance teachers’ self-efficacy, thus improving the quality of educational relationships. In Israel, research on the teachers’ stances on the switch to emergency remote learning and their experiences has been scant. The Taub Center surveyed about 6000 teachers with the assistance of the Teachers’ Union. The survey revealed that with hindsight, most of them concluded that remote teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic empowered them, proving they could overcome unpredicted difficulties [42].

Moreover, as far as we know, few research studies have been conducted in Israel and worldwide (except for inclusive education contexts) to examine teachers’ stands and perceptions about their relationships with students before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. This issue is of high importance since the teachers’ experiences directly affect those of the students and the educational relationships [43,44,45]. Studies that investigated how teachers experienced themselves and their students found a connection between this experience and students’ motivation [46], learning enjoyment [47], and other aspects. Two questions arise in this context: The first is whether difficulties and challenges accompanied the mentioned positive empowerment, and what were they? The second is whether there were differences between male and female teachers in this connection. This study aims to offer preliminary answers to both questions.

Research Questions

The purpose of the present study is to find out: (1) how Israeli educators perceive and evaluate the implications of the switch to emergency remote learning, and (2) what are the differences between female and male teachers, with emphasis on the social–emotional aspects of the switch to emergency remote learning, including self-perception and perception of the students.

3. Method

This study used a self-report questionnaire comprising closed and open questions. Using both quantitative and qualitative data and methods yielded rich and varied data on the studied topic (Mertens, 2019 [48]). Moreover, this study is exploratory in nature, seeking to understand teachers’ experiences and stances. The open-ended questions allowed a bottom-up analysis process to take place. This process yielded categories that may (in future studies) facilitate the formation of a grounded theory [49].

3.1. Participants

The research population included 154 teachers (85% female, N = 131) from the Israeli education system aged 28–71 (M = 44.7, SD = 9.25). Most teachers (60%) had B.A. degrees, and the rest had M.A. and higher degrees. Their average experience period was 13 years (SD = 0.72), within a range of 1 to 40 years. About 60% were primary school teachers, and the rest were teaching in post-primary schools. The average weekly teaching hours was 22.78 h (SD = 8.4), and 65% held full-time jobs.

3.2. Research Tools

The primary research tool was a self-report questionnaire comprising closed and open questions. The questionnaire was constructed by the author and its statements were improved following expert validation (three colleagues, who are experts in the field). It wished to focus on the experience of the self and others, in the switch to remote teaching. It was based on SEL models [50], emphasizing both internal aspects of students’ and teachers’ experience (self-awareness and self-management) and interpersonal ones (social-awareness and relationship skills).

The questionnaire was distributed to the participants online and had two parts. The first part comprised six closed statements regarding the switch to remote teaching: (1) The switch to remote learning undermined my experience as a teacher. (2) The switch to remote learning damaged the way I experienced my students. (3) The switch to remote learning increased the behavioral challenges I must handle in my work. (4) The switch to remote learning increased my students’ self-learning. (5) Following the switch to remote learning, I put greater emphasis on elements of authority and discipline. (6) The switch to remote learning highlights elements of equality and cooperation between my students and me. The replies were rated on a Likert scale, where 1 = wholly disagree and 5 = fully agree. The participants then had to freely describe in their own words “the effects of the switch to remote learning on your experiences and relations with the students.” In the questionnaire’s second part the participants listed their personal details (age, gender, education, years of experience, and weekly teaching hours) and background information of the school (grades, socioeconomic circumstances of the community).

The online questionnaire was distributed via different channels, including social networks, especially Facebook, through colleagues and acquaintances involved in education (on WhatsApp), and in M.A. and teaching specialization classrooms.

3.3. Data Analysis

The quantitative data analysis used descriptive statistic indices (central tendency and dispersion) and inferential methods, including t-tests. The qualitative content analysis used open coding, which served to categorize the qualitative data by content [49]. In this process, general themes were identified in the texts (the descriptive replies) and labeled. These labels were then gathered to form thematic categories. This process revealed five distinct nominal categories, each of them representing a basic view about the switch to emergency remote learning: (1) Favorable view of the change. (2) Negative perception of the change. (3) Perceiving the change as a challenge. (4) Perceiving the switch to remote learning as a complex event. (5) Other/no change. Each of them displays elements of personal experience and interpersonal relations, shedding light on various aspects of social–emotional learning during the emergency remote learning period.

4. Results

First, we present the quantitative findings that address the first research question (Teachers’ evaluation of the switch to remote learning).

Table 1. Participants’ remote learning experience: averages and standard deviations (N = 154).

Statement	Mean	SD
(1) The switch to remote learning worsened my teaching experience	2.53	1.12
(2) The switch to remote learning damaged my experience with the students	3.00	1.11
(3) The switch to remote learning increased the behavioral challenges I encounter in my work	2.71	1.21
(4) The switch to remote learning increased my students’ self-learning	3.87	0.99
(5) Following the switch to remote learning I put more emphasis in my teaching on elements of authority and discipline	2.51	1.01
(6) The switch to remote learning highlights elements of equality and cooperation between my students and me	3.21	1.05

displays the means and SDs. The most noticeable finding is the extent of the participants’ agreement with the fourth statement, i.e., that the switch to remote learning required the students to intensify their self-learning. The participants gave a middle rating to the sixth statement regarding partnership and equality between students and teachers and the second statement regarding a decline in the way the teachers experienced their students following the switch to remote learning. In other words, the participants somewhat agreed with the claim that the switch enhanced equality and partnership elements in the educational relations, and admitted that their attitude towards their students changed for the worse. Two items, 1 and 5, received a low rating. The participants did not think that the crisis caused by switching to emergency remote learning worsened their personal experience as teachers or lessened discipline and authority.

Gender differences (research questions: 2) were examined next. Significant differences emerged between male and female teachers with regard to statement 2 (experience with the students): male teachers (M = 3.43, SD-1.12) rated this statement higher than female teachers (M = 2.92, SD = 1.01). The differences were statistically significant (t = 2.05, p = 0.04).

The qualitative part of the research included 55 descriptive replies that provided a more detailed and personal picture of the trends revealed in the quantitative analysis. The replies were grouped into five general categories, presented in Figure 1.

The diagram indicates a general tendency to perceive the change as unwelcome, challenging, or complex. The categories underscore elements of effort and load in the way teachers perceive the change. The following are examples of descriptive replies in all categories.

Favorable view of the change—In this category, various aspects of teaching and learning as well as experience and personal connection qualities were regarded as favorable. The replies indicated that the change was viewed as an opportunity to improve educational processes. For example, developing the students’ self-management skills, enhancing the students’ research skills, more flexible thinking in teachers, and teachers and students step out of their comfort zones.

Many cases pointed to aspects of connection with the students and their families: Remote learning allows more personal attention to students who need it, as the timetables are more flexible. Additionally, the closer connection with the families during this period increased my cooperation with the parents and the students.

This change was sometimes perceived as promoting cooperation and reciprocity in the educational relations: A reciprocal increase in partnership and responsibility towards successful learning. A reciprocal increase in the involvement and investment in successful learning and enhanced learning experience. Greater mutual closeness.

The relatively high number of reactions indicates the existence of such approaches among educators, who might become the vanguard in a gradual incorporation of remote teaching and learning components.

Negative perception of the change—The most salient element in this category reveals various channels of interpersonal relations such as teachers–students, students–students, and teachers–parents, which are fundamentally related to the self-experience of value, security, and stability. Some reactions indicated a significant emotional difficulty due to the change: The distance from the class, the same beat, warmness, and activity often fill me with despair. My self-value has decreased. There are less disciplinary problems to deal with, but the mute button, the black square, and lack of response are worse than any disciplinary problem. I miss using my body and its movement, and this upsets me.

This sense of something missing and the resulting difficulty are sometimes described in great detail: (1) My acquaintance with them has lessened significantly. I can hardly remember all their names! And the students are aware of this. (2) I miss the dynamic of social learning that enhances learning, skills, and social connections. Zoom rooms are not a satisfactory substitute. (3) I feel that remote learning damages my self-value. After a long period of doing what I feel I am not good at, my motivation to make efforts goes down. (4) Too much bureaucratic and technological work leaves little time and energy to develop ties.

Reactions such as this demonstrate the perceived difficulties educators had to cope with, initially without a satisfactory response.

Perceiving the change as a challenge—Difficulties also emerged in this category, but rather than negativity, they yielded greater engagement. Interpreting the difficulty as a temporary situation to contend with, promising to be an opportunity for change, diverted the focus to a changed regard of the students and self-control: Remote learning is definitely challenging. First, it is different, and one must learn how to negotiate this ground. The children must learn this, and so must I. Some children have more difficulty. Working from home and not having to deal with disciplinary issues is quite convenient. However, this requires more preparation and some skills are difficult to teach remotely.

Some reactions touched on the challenge to relations: “It is more difficult to create a personal relationship with them, but once this is achieved, it is better.” Others emphasized the pedagogical challenge: It requires diversifying the teaching methods. It requires being attentive to the students—their appearance, whether or not they participate in the lesson. It requires developing tools to understand where a student has difficulty and come up with solutions to narrow the gap. It creates a space for self-learning.

The number of reactions to this category was relatively small, possibly indicating a relative scarcity in the field. If this is the case, reframing difficulty as an educational challenge would also be considerably demanding.

Perceiving the switch to remote learning as a complex event—This approach differentiated favorable and detrimental implications of the change, directing most of the attention to external phenomena, perhaps because the self-experience was perceived as sufficiently sound. It enabled spotting relevant phenomena, especially among students from different backgrounds. Examples regarding the students’ needs: The class is divided. Some students really enjoy remote learning, manage their time well, are capable of studying independently, and make good progress. Other students need to regain their previous routine. They are unable to concentrate in remote circumstances and are lost.

Other respondents emphasized the differences in the students’ self-learning abilities: I feel that strong students who have already developed independent learning skills enjoy their benefits and adapt well to remote learning. Weaker students enter the online lesson to show they are present and then go on sleeping or doing things other than learning.

Other participants focused on socioeconomic factors that affect the students’ individual experience: I think a significant differential emerges where those who have means and resources and those who don’t can’t understand each other’s needs. […] This hinders the children from developing independent connections, resulting in regression, an unconscious passive-aggressive attitude, and extra load on the class teacher.

All these views underscore the need to develop differential teaching capabilities and personalize education to respond to diversity and help narrow educational gaps.

Out of the 55 descriptive replies, 8 (14.5%) were men’s (15% of the research sample). This is, of course, a very small sample, which is a limitation. Still, it is worthwhile looking into the contents. While two of the replies (25%) addressed positive changes (“I have improved. The students are more active”, “The outcomes are all positive. I now use more digital learning means.”), three others (37.5%) expressed negative perceptions (“Acute damage to children whose home is unstable and non-supportive. The teacher is helpless”. “I feel that we both miss the experience of a face-to-face encounter”, “I think a strong differential emerged where those who have money and resources and those who do not stop understanding each other’s needs… This hinders an independent connection between the children that leads to regression, unaware passive-aggressive attitude, and a greater burden on the teacher.”) Two others (25%) commented on the general challenges of the switch, and the last one mentioned that he preferred working asynchronously and dedicated synchronic sessions to individual work (the “other/no change” category). Interestingly, none of the male teachers’ descriptive replies referred to the “complexity” category.

The qualitative analysis of the open comments has not revealed significant differences in the perception of the change. Within the different content categories, the reactions’ distribution was similar to the general distribution, except for an absence of comment in the “complexity” category. Does this indicate that the ability of male teachers to perceive the complexities of the abrupt and emotionally demanding switch to emergency remote learning is limited? Are male teachers less flexible in adjusting their emotional regulation processes [51]? Perhaps, but based on the verbal data of this study, it is impossible to determine this.

5. Discussion

The present study aimed to examine the stances of teachers in relation to the switch to emergency remote learning, particularly their social–emotional aspects (self-perception and perception of the students), with a focus on the gender variable. A significant difference emerged between male and female teachers concerning the students: male teachers experienced their students less favorably following the switch to emergency remote learning.

The analysis of the qualitative data concerning changes that occurred consequent to the switch to emergency remote learning reveals several interesting points. The data indicate no damage to the teachers’ self-perception, nor did they exercise more power or authority towards the students following the switch. On the contrary, there are signs that elements of partnership and equality have strengthened. It is not surprising that the switch has increased the need for self-learning, but this calls attention to two issues. The first regards the students and their own points of view and reactions to the transition. In contrast with the teachers’ experiences, described above, students stressed the social and emotional disadvantages of remote learning, including loss of social ties and feelings of fatigue [52], an increased frustration and lack (and/or difficulty in) engagement with peers and lecturers [53,54]. Such emotional and interpersonal experiences influence students’ well-being and academic achievements, especially those for whom self-learning negatively affects the conditions required for success. In the absence of sufficient monitoring and responses, their educational gaps risk broadening, as indeed seems to have happened [55,56]. Hence, it is necessary to prepare for similar future changes, be they part of imposed emergency remote learning or changes introduced into the study program and routine hybrid learning.

The second issue concerns the teachers’ ability to respond to the students’ needs, difficulties and deprivations. Teachers need to lead and guide self-learning processes to provide all the students with the conditions required for success. To do this, they should undergo dedicated training to foster the students’ self-learning skills and avoid broadening learning gaps. Social–emotional learning skills, including self-management abilities, differential student support, and creating a supportive environment of belongingness, would allow for contending with challenges teachers and students face and assist in narrowing gaps.

As already mentioned, the findings indicate that male teachers had greater difficulty communicating with their students. They admitted to having difficulty coping with their students who, they felt, changed for the worse following the switch to remote learning. Self-perception and interpersonal relations, which should ideally be a safe anchor in a changing environment, are undermined in male teachers. The potentially advantageous digital capabilities of male teachers [2,3,38] have not proven themselves in the switch to emergency remote learning. This may indicate that the source of difficulty was different and unrelated to the technological challenges involved in remote learning. One possible reason suggested in the professional literature associated the difficulty with the stress that sprang from the situation and the need to cope. Klapproth et al. [57] found that although female teachers were more stressed, they applied more effective coping strategies such as planning and looking for social support. Without them, the environment is perceived as problematic and filled with difficulties, as indeed happened to the men, whose perception of their students worsened. Stress management is another central aspect of individual and interpersonal social–emotional learning. Further research is required to explore this assumption and propose ways to deal with the situation.

The qualitative analysis of the teachers’ statements revealed a range of experiences and stands that highlight the dangers and challenges they faced alongside their prospects and future needs. Many comments indicated that they perceived the switch to emergency remote learning as a change for the worse (this was the most frequent category, with 20 comments). Another significant part of the statements concerned the challenge of adapting to the change (seven comments) and coping with the complexity of the new situation (eight comments). A significant difference emerged between the category of “unfavorable view of the change”, where the statements indicated distress, frustration, and external control, and the other two categories—“the change as a challenge to adapt to” and “complex perception of the change” that exhibited greater capacity and confidence. Yet, the comments related to these three categories comprised an overwhelming majority, expressing some extent of need or difficulty. Presumably, the difficulty may have partially sprung from the gap between reality, which kept changing sharply and speedily in the reviewed period, and the teachers’ expectations, skills, and work patterns. Training and professional development processes could help narrow this gap.

A gender analysis of the verbal responses did not reveal that male teachers viewed the change more negatively. In fact, the eight male teachers’ verbal responses’ positive, negative, and challenging distribution was similar to the entire sample. Notably, none expressed a complex view of the change. As mentioned, the limited sample size does not allow for deriving any definite conclusions from this finding, yet it paves the way for further research on gender differences in handling extreme emotional situations and emotion regulation flexibility [51]. Further indications of gender differences in social–emotional teaching aspects, particularly in online teaching circumstances, would require reexamining teacher training processes, specific gender abilities and weaknesses, and other demographic attributes such as culture [58].

5.1. Recommendations for Teacher Training

The discussed findings support the assumption that the main challenge of the switch to emergency remote learning was social–emotional, involving adjustment to the new reality and approaching the existing patterns with flexibility. This is a central trait of the current era, characterized by volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (VUCA). It requires incorporating into the education system teacher training, and teaching and learning elements focusing on social–emotional skills to assist in coping with a VUCA reality and support the well-being of teachers and of students alike [59].

On the theoretical level, the findings highlight the link between remote and social–emotional learning. These two terms, often perceived as representing contrasting educational approaches, complement each other in this case. It is, therefore, crucial to include social and emotional components in remote learning processes to make them more effective. This should be done in teacher training frameworks, over the teachers’ professional development period and even more so in the educational process with the students. In the absence of these components, the difficulties risk increasing, as the switch to emergency remote learning proves. The process appears to be two-way, as online tools may promote the social–emotional aspects of the teachers’ and students’ experience. This conclusion leans, among other things, on the rating and verbal comments that emphasized the positive value of the switch, despite being enforced. According to this approach, online learning offers new opportunities, especially compared to the traditional teaching–learning–evaluation norms. Among other things, it responds to diversity, creating better conditions for well-being and success for a variety of students and teachers. Further research might establish the association between remote and social–emotional learning, and develop an integrative theory for both.

5.2. Limitations and Further Research

The two main limitations of this research are the sample’s size and the extent of diversity, including in terms of gender. A solid representation of male teachers would yield more conclusive insights into gender differences. Another limitation regards the questionnaire constructed for this study. Its quantitative components enabled tracing general trends, but did not allow more refined observations, which could prove significant. At the same time, its qualitative components gave a glimpse into the participants’ personal experiences, but did not allow for delving deeper into them. Depth interviews could reveal a more detailed experiential range. Further validation is therefore required of the questionnaire’s effectiveness in assessing the social–emotional aspects of the teachers’ perception of themselves and their students.

Finally, the present research focused on the emergency switch to remote learning following the COVID-19 pandemic. Considering that the educational reality seems to have changed, it would be worthwhile to reexamine the views of different teacher groups regarding remote learning in routine rather than emergency circumstances. This would provide more relevant educational information, including regarding teacher training and professional development.

Further research studies are required: (1) To focus on and define difficulties and challenges springing from changing teaching and learning methods and integrating distance learning into the study programs. (2) To substantiate the findings of the present study regarding gender and experience differences in connection with such changes. (3) To support the assumption that the primary sources of difficulty are emotional and interpersonal. (4) To explore the effectiveness of integrating potential responses into teacher training and professional development programs.

6. Conclusions

Understanding teachers’ experiences may assist in establishing theoretical and practical approaches to remote learning, with emphasis on self-experience and educational relations that are not sufficiently prominent in the professional literature. The gender differences, supported by the participants’ free-style comments, substantiate the assumption that the teachers’ difficulties had personal (emotional) and interpersonal (social) bases. Teacher training programs should meet these challenges, which have become more prominent with the COVID-19 outbreak but are not specific to this period. Training teachers to handle complex personal and interpersonal situations and develop emotional management, empathy, and responsible decision-making skills is vital. These central aspects of social–emotional learning would contribute to teaching–learning–evaluation processes, including remote learning, specifically in emergency conditions. Increasing the weight of these components in teacher training would contribute to the well-being of educators and students and improve the educational climate.

As online learning becomes increasingly widespread, social–emotional learning components must be integral to it. Teacher training should correspondingly include social–emotional components that would allow the development of various strategies to cope with routine and emergency remote learning challenges. In an era of uncertainty and ambiguity, there is great significance to the mutual influences of personal experience and interpersonal relations. Strengthening them would allow educators to advance solid and self-assured learning in uncertain, changing circumstances. This would inspire the development of similar capacities in the students based on the teachers’ modeling and direct learning of social–emotional skills. Awareness of the significance of social emotional aspects in teaching may also encourage initiatives to enhance the teachers’ well-being, such as frameworks of peer-learning and sharing, and consequently the students’ well-being as well.