Faculty and Student Perspectives on Online Learning in Higher Education

Abstract

The international transforming learning community, coupled with cultural diversity and technological complexities, spurred an unprecedented acceleration in the adoption of online learning. This reshaped the educational landscape, presenting both challenges and opportunities for educators and learners worldwide. To provide insights into the use of information technology and online learning in higher education and to inform future practices, this qualitative study investigated university faculty and students’ online learning experiences. Purposeful sampling was employed to ensure a diverse selection of participants. Eight faculty and eight students from diverse higher education institutions in the U.S. participated in one-on-one interviews. The study utilized a social constructivist interpretive paradigm, and data were analyzed using iterative categorization. Findings revealed concerns about online learning effectiveness due to limited social interaction. Three main themes emerged: challenges encountered, student engagement, and strategies to improve online learning effectiveness. This research enriches the scholarly discourse on online education by elucidating faculty and student perceptions regarding factors impacting the effectiveness of online learning and sustainable teaching strategies for future higher education. It highlights a paradigm shift in higher education and emphasizes the importance of equitable access to digital resources and inclusive policies to address disparities in online learning support, promoting equity and social justice in education.

1. Introduction

The landscape of higher education has undergone a profound transformation with the widespread adoption of online learning in recent years, accelerated significantly by the COVID-19 pandemic. This shift has been driven by the increasing demand for flexible and accessible educational opportunities, as well as advancements in technology. However, this rapid transition has also introduced cultural diversity and technological complexities that reshaped the educational landscape, and present both challenges and opportunities for educators and learners worldwide.

Extensive research has been conducted to examine the viability of online learning, but has yielded divergent conclusions. While some studies document positive outcomes, the majority report negative perceptions and experiences among students, particularly in the United States [1,2]. These studies often focus on specific courses or programs within single institutions, highlighting a need for more comprehensive research across various contexts to understand not only whether online learning is effective, but also why.

Challenges and issues encountered by faculty and students in online learning have also been documented by the literature. Faculty reported challenges such as platform/medium malfunctions, unstable Internet access, and students’ decreased focus on online learning [3,4,5], while students faced challenges such as problems with technology and the Internet, distraction, reduced focus, decreased social interactions with professors and peers, inability to engage in the college community, and increased workload [6,7,8,9]. These challenges highlight the importance of examining the experiences of both faculty and students to inform more effective online learning strategies.

The urgent need for this research is also underscored by the declining college enrollment in the U.S., with the National Center for Education Statistics reporting a modest 0.4% drop from fall 2021 to fall 2022, continuing a longer-term trend observed since the pandemic’s onset during a longer-term downtrend observed since the pandemic’s start [10]. The World Economic Forum highlights a significant 10% reduction in college sign-ups during the pandemic, emphasizing the critical need for higher education institutions to explore effective online learning solutions [11].

Amidst this backdrop, the situation served as a crucible for the investigation of online teaching and learning experiences and perceptions among university faculty and students. It is imperative to devise flexible and consistent long-term plans in response to potential future disruptions in higher education. As the most direct audience and critical stakeholders, faculty and student attitudes, concerns, and suggestions based on their recent online learning experiences should be taken into account in those plans. Therefore, there is an urgent need to collect data from both faculty and students who have completed a wider range of online courses to explore their experiences with the courses and the practices they found satisfying. This will assist institutions in gaining deeper insights into the needs of both faculty and students, enabling them to provide students with more meaningful online learning experiences and promote more equitable teaching practices. Hence, this qualitative study aimed to delve into the nuanced dynamics of online learning, offering insights gleaned from comprehensive interviews with stakeholders immersed in the online learning environment. To achieve this goal, this research sought to answer the following research questions:

• What were the experiences of university faculty and students in online learning during the 2021–2022 academic year?
• What are their perceptions of sustainable teaching strategies for future higher education?

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Interpretive Paradigm

To better understand the experiences of university faculty and students in online learning, this study employed social constructivism as its interpretive paradigm. Social constructivists posit that knowledge and reality are constructed through social interactions and cultural contexts, emphasizing the role of language and communication in the construction of knowledge [12,13]. This paradigm acknowledges multiple subjective perspectives and the co-construction of meaning between individuals within their social and cultural environments [14,15]. Researchers operating under this paradigm seek to understand the world through the lived experiences and viewpoints of the participants [16]. University faculty and students developed subjective meanings of their experiences, which were multiple and varied, leading researchers to explore the complexity of views. These subjective meanings were negotiated between the participants and researchers [16]. Given the emphasis on participants’ perspectives, social constructivism was apt for this study’s exploration of how university faculty and students made sense of their online learning experiences.

2.2. Participants

Purposeful sampling was employed to recruit interview participants among faculty and students from diverse higher education institutions in the Midwest, USA. Six faculty participants were recruited based on their gender, age, overall teaching experience, and online teaching experience, with the type of institution and class setup also considered. Similarly, six student participants were recruited based on their gender, age, educational level, and online learning experience, with the type of institution and class setup also considered. These characteristics were used to ensure a diverse selection of participants, aiming to gather a wide range of perspectives and experiences. As the interviews progressed, an additional two faculty and two student participants were recruited to achieve data saturation. Below are the joint display Tables (

Table 1. Demographics and Survey Total Scores of Faculty Interview Participants (N = 8).

Name	Gender	Age	Years of Teaching	Years of Online Teaching	Type of Institution	Survey Total Score
Dr. SC	F	Over 45	40 years	13 years	4-year Private	161
Dr. RP	M	Over 45	25 years	2 years	4-year Public	156
Prof. SD	F	Over 45	20 years	1 year	Community	168
Dr. KC	M	41–45	15 years	0 year	4-year Public	147
Dr. KI	M	41–45	10 years	0 year	4-year Private	130
Miss RA	F	36–40	7 years	3 years	Community	151
Dr. HR	F	30–35	6 years	2 years	4-year Public	136
Dr. KK	M	30–35	2 years	0 year	4-year Public	166

and

Table 2. Demographics and Survey Total Scores of Student Interview Participants (N = 8).

Name	Gender	Age	Education Level	Online Learning Experience	Type of Institution	Survey Total Score
VR	F	Over 35	Ph.D.	3 online courses	4-year Public	186
WH	M	Over 35	Master’s	Some online learning	4-year Public	191
EG	Non-binary	30–35	Master	5 online courses	4-year Private	66
SC	F	24–29	Ph.D.	2 online courses	4-year Private	183
RN	M	18–23	Senior	2 online courses	4-year Public	155
SL	F	18–23	Junior	None	4-year Private	142
AF	F	18–23	Freshman	None	Community	128
HH	F	18–23	Freshman	None	Community	50

) exhibiting the demographics of faculty and student participants, as well as the total scores of their survey responses.

2.3. Interview Protocols

Interview protocols for both faculty and student participants were developed. Seventeen semi-structured interview questions were created to explore the experiences of university faculty and students in online teaching and learning, and their perceptions of sustainable teaching strategies for future higher education. The interview protocols were pilot-tested on two volunteers (one faculty member and one student), who were not part of the study but were willing to provide feedback. Based on the pilot test, the content and order of the interview questions were slightly revised, and additional probing questions were added accordingly.

2.4. Data Collection and Data Analysis

This study was conducted following the ethical guidelines and principles for research involving human subjects. After obtaining the approval for the study was from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at our university, an ethics committee that reviews and monitors research involving human subjects to ensure their rights and welfare are protected, data were collected through one-on-one semi-structured interviews, which was described by Fontana and Frey [17] as one of the most powerful ways to understand our fellow human beings. Emails explaining the study were sent to participants who had indicated their willingness to be interviewed and were selected. They were informed that there would be no risks associated with participating in the interview beyond those of everyday living, that participation was completely voluntary, and that they could withdraw at any time or refuse to answer any question without penalty. They were also informed that during the data analysis, the researchers would consult with them on how well the themes accurately represented their intended meanings and experiences, whether the phenomenon under study was accurately described, and that they would be requested to comment on the accuracy of verbatim quotes and provide permission for the researchers to use direct personal quotes in the final written report of the study.

Participants took part in a one-on-one Zoom interview at a prescheduled time. The mean duration of faculty interviews was 35.2 min, and for student interviews, it was 44.5 min. Both participants and the primary researcher remained in their respective private rooms during the interview to maintain confidentiality. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim using transcription software called Otter.ai to aid in subsequent data analysis. Reflexive memos were written to address the researcher’s perspectives, including subjectivity and positionality [16]. Data collection continued until saturation was reached.

Data analysis began concurrently with data collection using a systematic approach of iterative categorization [18], which involved open coding [19], described by Charmaz [20] as the critical link between data collection and meaning interpretation, inductive sorting of codes into categories based on the links between codes, and moving iteratively between data and the coding framework to refine codes into consistent and discrete categories. Based on the categories, major themes were then abstracted. Analytical memos were written alongside the coding process to “document and reflect on the coding process and code choices” [21], which helped to achieve the researchers’ reflexivity on the data corpus and provided documentation and transparency about the methodology. A codebook was developed based on the coding to guide the researchers’ report on research findings.

2.5. Trustworthiness of Interpretation

Guba and Lincoln [22,23] proposed approaches to establish the trustworthiness of interpretation and analysis in research, focusing on four criteria: credibility, transferability, dependability, and conformability. Credibility involves activities that enhance the likelihood of authentic findings, such as member checking, where participants review the developing findings to ensure accuracy [24]. To achieve credibility, the researchers solicited feedback from participants on the accuracy of verbatim quotes and secured their approval to utilize their direct personal quotes in the written reports of the study. Transferability refers to the potential for others to relate to the research context and extrapolate the findings to their own specific circumstances [22,23,25]. Transferability was achieved through one-on-one interviews and thick descriptions. Dependability, akin to reliability, refers to the consistency of study results over time and across researchers. Dependability was ensured with independent data analysis and regular meetings between the two researchers [26]. This was closely connected to conformability, the fourth component of trustworthiness. In addition, the primary researcher kept an audit trail [24] of the research process through memos to justify research decisions and enhance rigor.

2.6. A Search for Meaning

All participants in the study, despite being from different institutions, used Zoom as their primary platform for synchronous online learning. The analysis of the interview data yielded the following three themes concerning several aspects of online learning: (1) challenges encountered, (2) student engagement, and (3) strategies to improve the effectiveness of online learning. Below is a detailed presentation of these themes, providing valuable insights into online learning.

Theme 1: Challenges Encountered

All eight faculty participants spoke about the challenges they encountered in online teaching. Four major categories emerged from the data analysis: (1) technical issues, (2) students keeping their cameras off, (3) all sorts of distractions, and (4) students’ lack of self-discipline. The primary challenge for faculty participants in online teaching was technical issues. Four of the eight faculty participants described their experiences with those problems. Among the comments cited were those by Dr. P, who said:

I needed to record our Zoom meetings, but how I make that recording accessible to all the students was a challenge for me. I remember my first recording, I spent about two or three hours in order to convert it.

Five of the faculty participants expressed their frustration with students not turning their cameras on during synchronous Zoom class meetings. Dr. C recalled: “They wouldn’t turn their cameras on. When you are online lecturing to a wall of names, you have no idea if they are listening. They were really reluctant to engage”. Dr. I talked about similar things. He said: “I don’t force people to turn the cameras on, so it’s just a black thing with a name. I have no idea if they are even there. They are not responding. It’s really hard to get a conversation going”. Miss A and Dr. R shared the same experience. Miss A described it in detail vividly:

I am sure nearly 90% of my students don’t ever turn their cameras on. So I’m talking to little person icons. There’s no face to look at. I can go all semester without ever actually talking to a student, without ever seeing their face. Some of them don’t even turn their mics on, they just type in the chat. So I never hear their voice. It’s like, am I just talking to blank air?

For those students who did keep their cameras on, faculty participants noticed a lot of distractions in their background while having synchronous Zoom classes. Two of them shared their experiences. Dr. C described what she observed like this:

I had students have their cameras on. So you know, they would be in their dorm room, and people would be coming in, and they would be talking to them, and then dogs and cats, you know, they were babysitting, or had their kids at home. There was all kinds of stuff going on in the background, you know, yeah, television, radio, whatever. So they were much more distracted.

Dr. I spoke about the same problem: “Classes on Zoom open up to all sorts of interruptions that you might not have thought of, like people’s pets or parents wandering in and eating something, or other distractions which are much more prevalent”. Unlike face-to-face classroom teaching, online learning requires autonomy and self-discipline. As Dr. P stated in the interview: “Online learning has a lot to do with self-organizing, self-monitoring, self-regulating, which help students to build their self-discipline. Remote learning requires a lot of autonomy. You have to have autonomy and self-governing to monitor your own learning”. H, one of the student participants, expressed the same view. He said: “Being a college student learning online, you are gonna be disciplined, or you are not gonna make it”. However, not all the students are very well disciplined, as Dr. C put it:

I think some of it is because the students we have now, especially the freshmen and sophomores, you know, missed their senior years in high school. So they are very immature, a lot of them are not prepared for college at all, they are far from being self-disciplined, and it’s just been exacerbated because of learning online.

Miss A described another problem. She shared: “They were not watching those pre-recorded lectures, because that’s time consuming, you know, and the sense I got is the students didn’t want to read the book too, so they were not as prepared each week”. All eight student participants expressed the variety of challenges they ran into in online learning as well. Likewise, four major categories emerged from data analysis, as follows: (1) lack of interaction with peers, (2) feeling uncomfortable asking questions, (3) hard to stay focused and disciplined, and (4) late or no responses from professors. The biggest challenge student participants encountered in online learning was the lack of interaction with their peers. Four of them described the influence of this problem on their learning from various aspects. For example, G talked about her situation in this way:

I felt a lot of isolation. I couldn’t meet my peers in person and talk. I used to go out after class with my classmates, we would go out to eat and drink and stuff like that. But we couldn’t really do that now because we don’t meet in person. So a lot of those social things that we used to do were not existing anymore.

All of the eight student participants more-or-less mentioned that it was hard for them to stay focused and disciplined, with two of them explicitly highlighting it. Three of the eight student participants raised the issue of not being able to receive quick responses from professors, which made them frustrated and demotivated.

Theme 2: Student Engagement

An overwhelming majority (seven) of the faculty participants indicated students were much less engaged in online class activities and discussions. The following comments from faculty participants illustrated the low level of student engagement:

I noticed there was much less willingness to participate. I always had my students keep their cameras on, and they could be doing anything. So you don’t even know, they would be in their dorm room; people would be coming in and they would be talking to them, and then dogs and cats, you know, there was all kinds of stuff going on in the background, so they were much more distracted and less engaged. I think they can be much more focused in an actual classroom, when they are face to face, and they can’t get away with much. (Dr. C)

Similar situations were also described briefly by Dr. R and Dr. K. Dr. R shared: “I will say that engagement was not as much as it was in person because some people turned their cameras off, and they didn’t speak”. Likewise, Dr. K presented: “Not very much, I think, but it was just hard to tell, because they were all quiet in class, and I didn’t make them turn the cameras on. So I couldn’t really see”.

Only Dr. P believed most of his students reacted positively, and he thought it was due to individual learning styles. This is how he expressed his view:

I would say it depends on individual learning styles. Some of my students presented they prefer in person, and online is not the way they can learn meaningfully. Most of them, however, reacted positively in online classes. At first, it was challenging, and they were a little bit scared, and not confident, but little by little, we got most of the students comfortable with that kind of setting, and they engaged well. But still, we had some students who were not comfortable and said they would rather to go in person.

In the same way, six of the student participants indicated that their fellow students were significantly less engaged in online class activities and discussions. The following are descriptions by student participants of how their peers performed in online classes:

Class participation decreased. I think it was because relationships were hard to establish online. The dynamics are different. I held back a lot, you know. I think people communicate a lot through facial expressions, body language, you know, all kinds of stuff that you read people, and when it’s on Zoom, you’re only seeing a headshot, you know. Am I gonna say something wrong? Am I gonna offend you? So yeah, I’ve noticed that difference. I myself interacted very differently in person and online. (R)

Only two of the student participants said it was totally okay for them because “since we started doing the doctoral program, we kind of keep the routine for it”.

Theme 3: Strategies to Improve the Effectiveness of Online Learning

Half of the faculty participants specifically discussed how to improve the effectiveness of online learning. Each of them made one suggestion, as follows: (1) improve classroom management, (2) keep the line of communication open, (3) encourage more student interaction, and (4) create a physical space where people can collaborate better. Dr. C believed good classroom management would make great contribution to effective online learning. She explained:

I think a lot of it has to do with what we would call classroom management, you know, teaching students how to be in an online environment. I really think our students, in order for them to really get the most out of their online classroom, they need some training. How to be in an online class, where to set up your equipment, how to isolate yourself so that you’re not being distracted, how to use your camera, use the chat room, how to engage, how to participate by raising your hand in Zoom, or you know, whatever else the professor once wants you to do. I think students really need to be trained in terms of technology and online etiquette.

Dr. P contended that maintaining communication and interaction with students was of great importance for the effectiveness of online learning. He stated:

One of the adjustments I made was to create a situation that the line of communication was as strong as it was in person. So I had, for example, 24 h a day of open phone, anytime students could contact me. I gave them my personal phone number, my cell phone, so they had that opportunity. I invited them to communicate with me anytime via email. I also invited them if they wanted to talk with me via Zoom one on one. They had this opportunity. So, one important thing was keeping the line of communication open, because students may encounter any types of issues and they need your support and timely help.

Talking about student collaboration and interaction, Dr. I came up with a bold idea. He said:

I feel like a lot of the limitations now are not the software, it’s like the physical space of the person taking the class, or you know, the time zone issue, or the inability to actually collaborate on the same thing, like, you know, be sitting next to somebody at the table and working on the same thing with them, you know. There might be a place for virtual reality or things like that in there eventually, if that becomes more commonplace, that everybody can just meet up in, you know, meta verse, or whatever it is, that may eventually fill some of that, though it’s still not the same.

Three out of the eight student participants shared their ideas on how to improve online learning effectiveness. Again, each of them made one suggestion, as follows: (1) maintain high standards and expectations, (2) keep communication with students, and (3) use Lockdown Browser or other anti-cheating systems for testing. H strongly advised faculty to keep high standards and high expectations of their students. He presented: “The professors should let the students know, I am not going to lower the standards and expectations because we are on Zoom. It will be the same standards as face to face. Come prepared. Participate”. N shared the same view. As previously cited, he said:

After we went online, the work, oh, I’ll say the biggest frustration for me was the work became easier, the difficulty of the work fell off a cliff and assignments became monotonous very quickly, because the professor was less invested in challenging students. So I got super frustrated because I felt like my education was being devalued and I was demotivated.

Like Dr. P, H also believed keeping communication between students and their professors was of great significance for enhancing the effectiveness of online learning. She recounted:

The professor was just like an idea. They were persons, I’m sure somewhere, but they were more like an idea. And they’re like, alright, I’m the professor. Here are the seven videos I made for you for next class. Good luck. It felt like I was all on my own, very lonely and isolated.

During interviews, four student participants mentioned exam cheating. For example, H said: “Most of the students were like cheating through the exams, they were like giving each other answers”. It was N that strongly suggested using anti-cheating systems such as Lockdown Browser for testing in order to improve academic rigor and thereby enhance online learning effectiveness. He said: “I think the idea of using, you know, like Lockdown Browser or other anti-cheating systems, will have significant merit. It will kind of like force students to learn well and that will help improve online learning effectiveness, I guess”.

3. Discussion

Data analysis unveiled three primary themes: challenges encountered, student engagement, and strategies to improve the effectiveness of online learning. Through in-depth discussions, both faculty and student participants shed light on the various obstacles they faced in online learning, and offered valuable insights into sustainable strategies for enhancing online learning outcomes and promoting student success.

3.1. Challenges Encountered

The faculty grappled with a myriad of challenges, with technical issues emerging as a predominant concern, aligning with Hodges and Fowler [27]. The integration of technology into teaching presented hurdles as faculty navigated recording procedures, software functionalities, and Internet connectivity issues. This steep learning curve associated with transitioning to online platforms was particularly challenging for those less technologically adept. Moreover, the reluctance of students to activate their cameras during synchronous sessions posed significant obstacles, hindering engagement and interaction, which made it arduous for educators to gauge comprehension and foster dialog. The limitations of virtual learning were underscored by this impediment to real-time communication, complicating pedagogical strategies and inhibiting student–teacher rapport. Further, faculty encountered challenges stemming from students’ myriad distractions, supported by Means et al. [28], ranging from domestic disturbances to technological disruptions. The blurred boundaries between home and classroom environments compounded these issues, impeding focus and detracting from the learning experience. The prevalence of external stimuli underscored the need for adaptive instructional approaches that accommodate diverse learning contexts [29]. The inclusion of comprehensive support services is vital for effective online learning. Shea et al. [30] argue that robust student support systems, including tutoring and academic advising, play a critical role in student success. Lastly, faculty highlighted concerns regarding students’ self-discipline and academic preparedness. Online learning requires greater autonomy and self-regulation, demanding proactive engagement from students. However, participants noted disparities in students’ readiness for remote learning, attributing deficiencies to immaturity and inadequate academic foundations. These insights underscored the multifaceted nature of student support, such as addressing accessibility issues, ensuring equitable access to resources, and providing additional support for students with disabilities, and the importance of fostering self-directed learning skills, as emphasized by Scherer et al. [31].

Echoing faculty sentiments, students articulated challenges encountered in navigating online learning environments as well. Foremost among these was the pervasive sense of isolation resulting from limited peer interaction. The absence of face-to-face engagement deprived students of collaborative opportunities and social connections, exacerbating feelings of loneliness and detachment. Students also expressed discomfort in seeking clarification and posing questions during virtual sessions, inhibiting open discourse and intellectual exchange. This reticence highlighted the significance of cultivating inclusive and supportive learning environments that facilitate uninhibited inquiry and dialog. Additionally, students grappled with issues of focus and discipline, contending with inherent distractions and time management challenges inherent in remote learning. The absence of external structure and accountability mechanisms necessitated greater self-regulation, posing difficulties for individuals accustomed to traditional classroom settings. Lastly, students lamented delays and inadequacies in professorial feedback, citing frustrations with communication channels and responsiveness. The lack of timely guidance impeded progress and compounded feelings of alienation, underscoring the critical role of instructor–student rapport in facilitating academic success.

3.2. Student Engagement

The theme of student engagement emerged as a focal point in the analysis of both faculty and student perceptions of online learning. Across the board, participants articulated concerns regarding the diminished level of student engagement in online class activities and discussions, highlighting the multifaceted challenges inherent in virtual education. Faculty expressed concerns about the diminished level of student engagement in online learning environments. They attributed this disengagement to various factors such as technological barriers, personal distractions, and reduced accountability. The absence of visual cues, like turned-off cameras and muted microphones, made it challenging for instructors to gauge comprehension and interaction. Moreover, faculty noted a decline in student preparedness and participation, suggesting a disconnect between the virtual classroom and traditional face-to-face instruction. While some research, such as that by Wang et al. [32], suggests that personalized learning experiences and adaptive technology can enhance student engagement, others, like Shea et al. [30], emphasize the importance of course design and workload in promoting engagement.

Similarly, students echoed faculty sentiments, expressing frustration with the lack of engagement among their peers in online classes. They attributed this decline to a combination of factors including Zoom fatigue, distractions, and a sense of detachment from the learning process. Many students reported feeling isolated and disconnected from their academic pursuits, citing a lack of motivation and ownership over course content. These findings align with the meta-analysis by Wang et al. [33], which suggests that student engagement tends to be lower in online courses compared to face-to-face settings due to factors like social isolation, lack of immediate feedback, and decreased instructor presence.

To enhance student engagement, proactive measures are crucial. Educators should focus on fostering a sense of community and collaboration, utilizing technology to facilitate meaningful interaction and participation. Efforts to address technological barriers and provide comprehensive support mechanisms are crucial in overcoming challenges associated with virtual instruction. Additionally, educators should explore innovative pedagogical approaches that promote active learning and cater to diverse learning styles and preferences. It is essential for institutions to recognize the unique needs and challenges faced by both faculty and students in the online learning landscape, allocating resources and support services accordingly. Collaborative efforts between stakeholders, including administrators, faculty, and students, are vital in fostering a culture of engagement and success in virtual education. By prioritizing student-centered approaches and leveraging technology to enhance learning experiences, educators can establish inclusive and dynamic online learning environments conducive to academic achievement and student well-being. Our findings, supported by the literature [34,35], suggest that effective online teaching requires not only technological proficiency, but also the ability to engage students actively and create a sense of community. This is particularly important in live online sessions, where real-time interaction can significantly enhance learning outcomes.

4. Strategies to Improve the Effectiveness of Online Learning

The data analysis revealed several insightful suggestions from both faculty and students on enhancing the effectiveness of online learning, covering various aspects ranging from classroom management to assessment integrity, highlighting the multifaceted nature of the challenges and potential solutions in online learning. Faculty participants emphasized the importance of proactive measures to enhance the quality and engagement of online instruction. Key suggestions included improving classroom management, maintaining open lines of communication, encouraging student interaction, and exploring innovative approaches to foster collaboration. These recommendations underscored the critical role of instructors in creating conducive learning environments and in facilitating meaningful student engagement in virtual settings. By addressing logistical barriers and promoting active participation, faculty can enhance the effectiveness of online learning and optimize student outcomes. Means et al. [28] emphasized the importance of institutional support, advocating for ongoing faculty training and investment in technology infrastructure. Additionally, Shea et al. [30] highlighted the critical role of student support services, such as tutoring, academic advising, and technical assistance, in enhancing online learning outcomes and student retention.

Student perspectives offered valuable insights into the effectiveness of online learning from the learner’s standpoint. Students highlighted the importance of maintaining high academic standards and expectations, fostering communication between students and instructors, and implementing robust measures to ensure assessment integrity. These recommendations emphasized the need for transparent communication, academic rigor, and technological safeguards to support effective online learning. By prioritizing student-centered approaches and addressing concerns related to academic integrity and engagement, educators can create inclusive and dynamic online learning environments conducive to student success. This finding is supported by Hrastinski et al. [36], highlighting the role of social presence, advocating for fostering a sense of community and belonging through collaborative activities and peer interaction to enhance student engagement and learning outcomes. Furthermore, our study highlights the importance of continuous professional development for faculty to stay updated with the latest online teaching strategies and tools, as also emphasized by recent research [37,38].

The findings suggest a need for collaborative efforts between faculty and students to enhance the effectiveness of online learning. Educators should prioritize strategies to promote active engagement, facilitate communication, and ensure academic rigor in virtual instruction. Additionally, institutions should invest in technological infrastructure and support services to address logistical challenges and promote student success in online learning environments. By adopting a holistic approach that integrates pedagogical innovation, technological resources, and student support mechanisms, educators can optimize the effectiveness and accessibility of online education, ultimately fostering a culture of lifelong learning and academic excellence.

5. Conclusions

This study has shed light on the challenges encountered by university faculty and students in online learning, emphasizing technical issues, student engagement, and strategies for improvement. The faculty faced hurdles such as technological barriers and student distractions, while students grappled with isolation and difficulties in maintaining focus. Despite these challenges, proactive measures have been identified to enhance online learning effectiveness. The study underscored the importance of joint efforts among faculty, students, and institutions in fostering a culture of engagement and success in online education. By addressing challenges and implementing effective strategies, educators can foster inclusive and dynamic online learning environments that support academic achievement and student well-being. While this study provides valuable insights, it is not without limitations. Its findings, drawn from a specific context, may not universally apply to all online learning settings. Future research could examine the effectiveness of specific interventions in addressing the identified challenges and enhancing student engagement. Additionally, investigating the long-term effects of online learning on student outcomes and well-being would contribute valuable insights into the sustainability of virtual education.