Face to Face, Online or Something in Between: Student Perceptions of Student Engagement in Different Learning Environments
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18357/otessaj.2024.4.3.73Keywords:
student engagement, distance education, graduate students, online education, emergency remote education, COVID-19Abstract
When COVID-19 began, educational institutions quickly shifted traditional face-to-face (F2F) courses to an online model, termed Emergency Remote Education (ERE) (Bozkurt et al., 2020). Previous studies have developed extensive theories on F2F and online education, demonstrating a positive link between student engagement (SE) and student success. Using Critical Incident Technique, this paper examined the changes in SE from F2F to ERE and identified the factors influencing these changes. The results confirmed that SE differs between F2F and ERE, with primary factors including course design and organization, learning with peers, student-faculty interaction, and social interaction. Notably, a supportive environment, integral to the SE model in F2F settings but absent in the Community of Inquiry framework, emerged as a key factor in ERE. Based on these findings, this study proposes a new SE model for flexible delivery methods. Post-pandemic reports (Irhouma & Johnson, 2022; D. N. Johnson, 2021; N. Johnson, 2023; National Survey of Student Engagement, 2021, 2023; Veletsianos et al., 2023) highlight the ongoing impact of the pandemic on students and teachers. The 2023 Pan-Canadian Report on Digital Learning Trends indicates that faculty and students now favor more flexible teaching and learning methods (Johnson, 2023). Current research on ERE remains limited (Stewart et al., 2023), with fewer studies on models for engagement in ERE. This paper contributes insight which aims to provide a foundation for further investigation into online and flexible learning.
Metrics
References
Anderson, T. (2008). The theory and practice of online learning. (2nd ed.). AU Press. https://www.aupress.ca/app/uploads/120146_99Z_Anderson_2008-Theory_and_Practice_of_Online_Learning.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.15215/aupress/9781897425084.004
Andersson, B.-E., & Nilsson, S.-G. (1964). Studies in the reliability and validity of the critical incident technique. Journal of Applied Psychology, 48(6), 398–403. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0042025 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0042025
Askham, P. (2008). Context and identity: Exploring adult learners’ experiences of higher education. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 32(1), 85–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098770701781481 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03098770701781481
Astin, A. W. (1968). The college environment. American Council on Education.
Astin, A. W. (1985). Involvement the cornerstone of excellence. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 17(4), 35–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.1985.9940532 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.1985.9940532
Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college?: Four critical years revisited. Jossey-Bass.
Berg, G. V. D. (2020). Context matters: Student experiences of interaction in open distance learning. The Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education TOJDE, 21(4), 223–236. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.803411 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.803411
Bork-Hüffer, T., Kulcar, V., Brielmair, F., Markl, A., Immer, D. M., Juen, B., Walter, M. H., & Kaufmann, K. (2021). University students’ perception, evaluation, and spaces of distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic in Austria: What can we learn for post-pandemic educational futures? Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), 13(14), 7595. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147595 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147595
Bower, B. L., & Hardy, K. P. (2004). From correspondence to cyberspace: Changes and challenges in distance education. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2004(128), 5–12. http://doi.org/10.0.3.234/cc.169 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.169
Bowman, N. A. (2013). How much diversity is enough? The curvilinear relationship between college diversity interactions and first-year student outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 54(8), 874–894. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-013-9300-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-013-9300-0
Bozan, K., Gaskin, J., & Stoner, C. (2024). Student engagement in the HyFlex and online classrooms: Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 29(1), 509–536. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-023-09661-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-023-09661-x
Bozkurt, A. (2019). From distance education to open and distance learning: A holistic evaluation of history, definitions, and theories. In S. Sisman-Ugur & G. Kurubacak (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Learning in the Age of Transhumanism (pp. 252–273). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-8431-5.ch016 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-8431-5.ch016
Bozkurt, A. (2022). A retro perspective on blended/hybrid learning: Systematic review, mapping and visualization of the scholarly landscape. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2022(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.751 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.751
Bozkurt, A., Jung, I., Xiao, J., Vladimirschi, V., Schuwer, R., Egorov, G., Lambert, S. R., Al-Freih, M., Pete, J., Olcott, D. J., Rodes, V., Aranciaga, I., Bali, M., Alvarez, A. V. J., Roberts, J., Pazurek, A., Raffaghelli, J. E., Panagiotou, N., de Coëtlogon, P., … Paskevicius, M. (2020). A global outlook to the interruption of education due to COVID-19 pandemic: Navigating in a time of uncertainty and crisis. Asian Journal of Distance Education. 15(1), 1–126. https://www.asianjde.com/ojs/index.php/AsianJDE/article/view/462
Butterfield, L. D., Borgen, W. A., Amundson, N. E., & Maglio, A.-S. T. (2005). Fifty years of the critical incident technique: 1954-2004 and beyond. Qualitative Research : QR, 5(4), 475–497. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794105056924 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794105056924
Carrillo, C., & Flores, M. A. (2020). COVID-19 and teacher education: A literature review of online teaching and learning practices. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43(4), 466–487. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1821184 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1821184
Castellanos-Reyes, D. (2020). 20 years of the community of inquiry framework. TechTrends, 64(4), 557–560. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00491-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00491-7
Christenson, S. L., Wylie, C., & Reschly, A. L. (2012). Handbook of research on student engagement. Springer Science+Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7
Collins Dictionary. (n.d.). Cognition. In collinsdictionary.com dictionary. Retrieved January 4, 2020, from https://www.collinsdictionary.com/english-language-learning/cognition
Creswell, J. W. (2015). Educational research planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (5th ed.). Pearson Education.
Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining Validity in Qualitative Inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 124–130. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2
Dixson, M. D. (2015). Measuring student engagement in the online course: The online student engagement scale (OSE). Online Learning Journal, 19(4). https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v19i4.561 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v19i4.561
Dunlap, J. C., & Lowenthal, P. R. (2018). Online educators’ recommendations for teaching online: Crowdsourcing in action. Open Praxis, 10(1), 79–79. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.10.1.721 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.10.1.721
Ensmann, S., Whiteside, A., Gomez-Vasquez, L., & Sturgill, R. (2021). Connections Before Curriculum: The role of social presence during COVID-19 emergency remote learning for students. Online Learning (Newburyport, Mass.), 25(3), 36. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v25i3.2868 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v25i3.2868
Esmail, B., Whittaker, T., & Yang, Y. (2010). Mixing it up: More experiments in hybrid learning. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 25, 97–103. https://cs.franklin.edu/~whittakt/CCSCSC0410.pdf
Filak, V. F., & Sheldon, K. M. (2008). Teacher support, student motivation, student need satisfaction, and college teacher course evaluations: Testing a sequential path model. Educational Psychology, 28(6), 711–724. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410802337794 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410802337794
Finnestrand, H., Vie, O. E., & Boak, G. (2023). Critical incident technique and action learning to enable organizational learning. Action Learning: Research and Practice, 20(3), 221–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767333.2023.2255839 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14767333.2023.2255839
Flanagan, J. C. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin, 51(4), 327–358. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0061470 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0061470
Fraillon, J., Strietholt, R., & Meinck, S. (2022). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on education: International evidence from the Responses to Educational Disruption Survey (REDS). United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000380398.locale=en
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Gao, X. (2020). Australian students’ perceptions of the challenges and strategies for learning Chinese characters in emergency online teaching. International Journal of Chinese Language Teaching, 1, 83–98. https://doi.org/10.46451/ijclt.2020.06.04 DOI: https://doi.org/10.46451/ijclt.2020.06.04
Garrison, D. R. (2003). E-Learning in the 21st Century: A framework for research and practice. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203166093 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203166093
Garrison, D. R. (2011). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203838761 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203838761
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. International Journal of Phytoremediation, 21(1), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640109527071 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640109527071
Gowing, A. (2019). Peer-peer relationships: A key factor in enhancing school connectedness and belonging. Educational & Child Psychology, 36(2), 64–77. https://doi.org/10.53841/bpsecp.2019.36.2.64 DOI: https://doi.org/10.53841/bpsecp.2019.36.2.64
Green, J. K., Burrow, M. S., & Carvalho, L. (2020). Designing for transition: Supporting teachers and students cope with emergency remote education. Postdigital Science and Education, 2(3), 906–922. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-020-00185-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-020-00185-6
Groccia, J. E. (2018). What is student engagement? New Directions for Teaching & Learning, 2018(154), 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20287 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20287
Gnusowski, M., & Schoefer, K. (2022). Student-to-student interactions in marketing education: A Critical Incident Technique-based inquiry into drivers of students’ (dis)satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Education, 44(1), 25-40. https://doi.org/10.1177/02734753211027617 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/02734753211027617
Heilporn, G., & Lakhal, S. (2021). Converting a graduate-level course into a HyFlex modality: What are effective engagement strategies? The International Journal of Management Education, 19(1), 100454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2021.100454 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2021.100454
Hisham, D., Rozhan, M. I., & Hanafi, A. (2005). Interaction in open distance learning: Research issues in Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Distance Education, 7(2), 63–77. http://mjde.usm.my/vol7_2_2005/mjde7_2_5.pdf
Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. EDUCAUSE Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning
Hu, S., & Kuh, G. D. (2001). Being (dis)engaged in educationally purposeful activities: The influences of student and institutional characteristics. American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA. (ED452776). ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED452776.pdf
Huang, J. (2020). Successes and challenges: Online teaching and learning of chemistry in higher education in china in the time of COVID-19. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(9), 2810–2814. https://doi.org/10.1021/j.jchemed.0c00671 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00671
Hughes, J. N., Luo, W., Kwok, O.-M., & Loyd, L. K. (2008). Teacher-student support, effortful engagement, and achievement: A 3-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.1
Irhouma, T., & Johnson, N. (2022). Digital learning in Canada in 2022: A changing landscape. Canadian Digital Learning Research Association. https://www.cdlra-acrfl.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/2022_national_report_en.pdf
Johnson, N. (2019). Tracking online education in Canadian universities and colleges: National survey of online and digital learning 2019 national report (pp. 1–63). Canadian Digital Learning Research Association. https://www.cdlra-acrfl.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/2019_national_en.pdf
Johnson, N. (2023). An increasing demand for technology use in teaching and learning: 2023 Pan-Canadian report on digital learning trends in Canadian post-secondary education. Canadian Digital Learning Research Association. https://www.cdlra-acrfl.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/2023-Pan-Canadian-Report-EN.pdf
Kahu, E. R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38(5), 758–773. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.598505 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.598505
Kanuka, H., Rourke, L., & Laflamme, E. (2007). The influence of instructional methods on the quality of online discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 260–271. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00620.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00620.x
Kuh, G. D. (2003). What we’re learning about student engagement from NSSE. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 35(2), 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091380309604090 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00091380309604090
Kuh, G. D. (2009). The national survey of student engagement: Conceptual and empirical foundations. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2009(141), 5–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.283 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.283
Kuh, G. D., Cruce, T. M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. M. (2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 540–563. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2008.11772116 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2008.11772116
Kurt, S. Ç., & Yıldırım, İ. (2018). The students’ perceptions on blended learning: A Q method analysis. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 18(2), 427–446. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2018.2.0002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2018.2.0002
Lai, C., Lin, H., Lin, R., & Tho, P. D. (2019). Effect of peer interaction among online learning community on learning engagement and achievement. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 17(1), 66–77. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJDET.2019010105 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/IJDET.2019010105
Lakhal, S., Bateman, D., & Bédard, J. (2017). Blended synchronous delivery modes in graduate programs: A literature review and how it is implemented in the master teacher program. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 10, 47–60. https://doi.org/10.22329/celt.v10i0.4747 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22329/celt.v10i0.4747
Lawrence-Benedict, H., Pfahl, M., & Smith, S. J. (2019). Community of Inquiry in online education: Using student evaluative data for assessment and strategic development. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2019.100208 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2019.100208
Lyons, E. (2024). Teaching and Social Presence in HyFlex Classrooms: Setting the Climate for Effective Group Cohesion (Publication No. 9520) [Master thesis, University of Windsor]. Electronic Theses and Dissertations. https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/etd/9520
Mather, M., & Sarkans, A. (2018). Student perceptions of online and face-to-face learning. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 10(2), 61–76.
Merriam, S. B. (1995). What can you tell from an N of 1?: Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research. PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning, 4, 51–60.
Murdock, J., & Williams, A. (2011). Creating an online learning community: Is it possible. Innovative Higher Education, 36(5), 305–315.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-011-9188-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-011-9188-6
Natarajan, J., & Joseph, M. A. (2022). Impact of emergency remote teaching on nursing students’ engagement, social presence, and satisfaction during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Nursing Forum, 57(1), 42–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12649 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12649
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students. Volume 2, A third decade of research (1st ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Paulsen, J., & McCormick, A. C. (2020). Reassessing disparities in online learner student engagement in higher education. Educational Researcher, 49(1), 20–29. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X19898690 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X19898690
Pregowska, A., Masztalerz, K., Garlińska, M., & Osial, M. (2021). A worldwide journey through distance education—From the post office to virtual, augmented and mixed realities, and education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Education Sciences, 11(3), 118. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11030118 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11030118
Redmond, P., Abawi, L. A., Brown, A., Henderson, R., & Heffernan, A. (2018). An online engagement framework for higher education. Online Learning Journal, 22(1), 183–204. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1175 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1175
Reeve, J., & Tseng, C. M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 257–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002
Richardson, J. C., & Swan, K. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students’ perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 7(1), 68–88. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v7i1.1864 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v7i1.1864
Robson, K., & Mills, A. J. (2022). Teaching, fast and slow: Student perceptions of emergency remote education. Journal of Marketing Education, 44(2), 203–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/02734753221084585 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/02734753221084585
Salas-Pilco, S. Z., Yang, Y., & Zhang, Z. (2022). Student engagement in online learning in Latin American higher education during the COVID‐19 pandemic: A systematic review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(3), 593–619. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13190 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13190
Saldana, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (J. Seaman, Ed.). SAGE Publications.
Serhan, D. (2020). Transitioning from face-to-face to remote learning: Students’ attitudes and perceptions of using Zoom during COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 4(4), 335–342. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.v4i4.148
Sharma, A., & Alvi, I. (2021). Evaluating pre and post COVID 19 learning: An empirical study of learners’ perception in higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 7015–7032. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10521-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10521-3
Shevchenko, O., Tkachenko, V., Tkachenko, K., & Nenko, Y. (2022). Communication barriers in emergency remote education. Revista Brasileira de Educação Do Campo,7, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.20873/uft.rbec.e14210 DOI: https://doi.org/10.20873/uft.rbec.e14210
Shin, M., & Hickey, K. (2020). Needs a little TLC: Examining college students’ emergency remote teaching and learning experiences during COVID-19. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2020.1847261 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2020.1847261
Shulman, L. S. (2002). Making differences: A table of learning. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 34(6), 36–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091380209605567 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00091380209605567
Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(4), 571–581. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.85.4.571 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.85.4.571
Skinner, E. A., Wellborn, J. G., & Connell, J. P. (1990). What it takes to do well in school and whether I’ve got it: A process model of perceived control and children’s engagement and achievement in school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 22–32. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.22 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.82.1.22
Stewart, W. H., Lowenthal, P. R., & Richter, D. (2023). A model of remote teaching and learning under emergency and sustained crisis conditions: A description of novel distance education contexts and manifestations. The Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education TOJDE, 24(2), 183–201. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.1090810 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.1090810
Swan, K., & Ice, P. (2010). The community of inquiry framework ten years later: Introduction to the special issue. Internet and Higher Education, 13(1–2), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.11.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.11.003
Tenenbaum, H. R., Winstone, N. E., Leman, P. J., & Avery, R. E. (2020). How effective is peer interaction in facilitating learning? A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(7), 1303–1319. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000436 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000436
Thomson, S. (2010). Sample size and grounded theory. JOAAG, 5(1), 45–52. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3037218
Trowler, V. (2010). Student engagement literature review. The Higher Education Academy.
Vibert, A. B., & Shields, C. (2003). Approaches to student engagement: Does ideology matter? McGill Journal of Education, 38(002), 221–240. https://mje.mcgill.ca/article/view/8682
Waters, J. (2015). Snowball sampling: A cautionary tale involving a study of older drug users. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18(4), 367–380. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2014.953316 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2014.953316
West, M. (2023). An ed-tech tragedy? Educational technologies and school closures in the time of COVID-19. In K. Davison, Kate & R. Yaghmour, (Ed.). United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural. https://doi.org/10.54675/LYGF2153 DOI: https://doi.org/10.54675/LYGF2153
Woolsey, L. K. (1986). The critical incident technique: An innovative qualitative method of research. Canadian Journal of Counselling, 20(4), 242–254.
Zagkos, C., Kyridis, A., Kamarianos, I., Dragouni, Κ. E., Katsanou, A., Kouroumichaki, E., Papastergiou, N., & Stergianopoulos, E. (2022). Emergency remote teaching and learning in Greek universities during the COVID-19 pandemic: The attitudes of university students. European Journal of Interactive Multimedia and Education, 3(1), e02207–e02207. https://doi.org/10.30935/ejimed/11494 DOI: https://doi.org/10.30935/ejimed/11494
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Hongran Cui, Michelle Harrison , Victoria Handford
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors contributing to the OTESSA Journal agree to release their articles under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. This licence allows this work to be copied, distributed, remixed, transformed, and built upon for any purpose provided that appropriate attribution is given, a link is provided to the license, and changes made were indicated.
Authors retain copyright of their work and grant the OTESSA Journal right of first publication.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the OTESSA Journal.
