Moving Higher Education Beyond Covid-19: Innovative and Technology-Enhanced Approaches to Teaching and Learning 1803825189, 9781803825182

Citation preview

Moving Higher Education Beyond Covid-19

EMERALD STUDIES IN HIGHER EDUCATION, INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY Series Editors: Miltiadis D. Lytras and Anna Visvizi Emerald Studies in Higher Education, Innovation and Technology seeks to provide a multifaceted and interdisciplinary approach to these interconnected topics and invites proposals from all scholars working in these fields. The underlying purpose of this series is to demonstrate how innovations in education, educational technology and teaching can advance research and practice and help us respond to socio-economic changes and challenges. The series has a broad scope, covering many topics, including but not limited to learning analytics, open and distributed learning, technology enhanced learning, digital pedagogies, data mining, virtual and augmented realities, cloud computing, social media, educational robotics, flipped classrooms, active learning, innovation networks and many more. Interested in publishing in this series? Please contact Miltiadis D. Lytras and Anna Visvizi at [email protected] and [email protected]. Published books: The Future of Innovation and Technology in Education: Policies and Practices for Teaching and Learning Excellence (2018) Anna Visvizi, Miltiadis D. Lytras and Linda Daniela Management and Administration of Higher Education Institutions at Times of Change (2019) Anna Visvizi, Miltiadis D. Lytras and Akila Sarirete Technology-enhanced Learning and Linguistic Diversity: Strategies and Approaches to Teaching Students in a 2nd or 3rd Language (2020) Patrick-André Mather Effective Leadership for Overcoming ICT Challenges in Higher Education: What Faculty, Staff and Administrators Can Do to Thrive Amidst the Chaos (2021) Antonella Carbonaro and Jennifer Moss Breen Teaching the EU: Fostering Knowledge and Understanding in the Brexit Age (2021) Anna Visvizi, Mark Field and Marta Pachocka

Moving Higher Education Beyond Covid-19: Innovative and Technology-Enhanced Approaches to Teaching and Learning

EDITED BY

ANNA VISVIZI SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Poland

MILTIADIS D. LYTRAS Effat University, Saudi Arabia AND

HAIFA JAMAL AL-LAIL Effat University, Saudi Arabia

United Kingdom – North America – Japan – India – Malaysia – China

Emerald Publishing Limited Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley BD16 1WA, UK First edition 2023 Editorial matter and selection © 2023 Anna Visvizi, Miltiadis D. Lytras, and Haifa Jamal Al-Lail Individual chapters © 2023 The authors. Published under exclusive licence by Emerald Publishing Limited. Reprints and permissions service Contact: [email protected] No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without either the prior written permission of the publisher or a licence permitting restricted copying issued in the UK by The Copyright Licensing Agency and in the USA by The Copyright Clearance Center. Any opinions expressed in the chapters are those of the authors. Whilst Emerald makes every effort to ensure the quality and accuracy of its content, Emerald makes no representation implied or otherwise, as to the chapters’ suitability and application and disclaims any warranties, express or implied, to their use. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN: 978-1-80382-518-2 (Print) ISBN: 978-1-80382-517-5 (Online) ISBN: 978-1-80382-519-9 (Epub)

Contents

Preface

xi

Anna Visvizi, Miltiadis D. Lytras, Haifa Jamal Al-Lail Chapter 1  To Educate, Not Simply to Teach: Higher Education Institutions Post-Covid-19 Anna Visvizi, Miltiadis D. Lytras and Haifa Jamal Al-Lail

1

Part 1: Emergencies, Adaptation and the Imperative of Quality Education Chapter 2  HEIs in Times of Covid-19: A Bibliometric Analysis of Key Research Themes Radosław Malik and Michał Siczek

13

Chapter 3  Online Teaching in HEIs vs. Online International Negotiation: Analogies and Transferable Good Practices Christian Pauletto29 Chapter 4  PANCOE: A Fresh Alternative to Post-Covid-19 Challenges in Education: The Case of Tourism Education Alejandra Zuccoli and Maximiliano E. Korstanje53 Part 2: Lessons the Covid-19 Pandemic Has Taught Us Chapter 5  Remote Learning During the Covid-19 Pandemic: Opportunities in Higher Education Daiga Kalniņa, Dita Nı¯mante, Sanita Baranova and Alise Oļesika67 Chapter 6  Life Career Skills Development in Higher Education Due to Covid-19: A Multivariate Approach to Students’ Perceptions Ioanna Papavassiliou-Alexiou, Christina Zourna, Nikos Koutsoupias and Aikaterini Papakota87

vi   Contents

Chapter 7  Rethinking Action Learning During the Covid-19 Pandemic: Highlights From the Italian Context Francesca Loia and Davide de Gennaro

109

Part 3: Moving Forward: Rethinking Education in the Post-Covid-19 World Chapter 8  Enabling Students’ Uptake of Feedback Anna Moni

129

Chapter 9  Implications of the Covid-19 Pandemic on High School Graduates Plans and Education Path Zane Varpina, Kata Fredheim and Marija Krumina

147

Chapter 10  The Pandemic Experience as a New Challenge for Public Czech Universities Miroslav Dopita, Lucie Rohlíková, Andrea Sojková and Vít Zouhar

165

Chapter 11  Humanistic Leadership and its Enduring Legacy in a Post-Covid-19 World Angela Lehr and Susie Vaughan

195

Index

211

About the Contributors

Haifa Jamal Al-Lail, Ph.D., is the President of Effat University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. She was awarded a Ph.D. in Public Policy from the University of Southern California. Before joining Effat University in 1998, she served as the first Dean of Girls’ Campus in King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia. She is a distinguished leader, respected academic, renowned advocate of youth engagement and author of several articles; having also delivered many keynote speeches on women’s education in the Middle East, women and change and entrepreneurship and business. She is a winner of the 1000 Women for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2005. She is also the recipient of many awards such as the Innovation Award, Saudi Sayidaty, Queen Effat’s Distinction Award, Leading Woman CEO, Distinguished Arab Woman Award, World Family Summit Award and the Distinguished Arabian Woman Award. She continues to work toward enhancing women’s education throughout Saudi Arabia. Sanita Baranova is an Assistant Professor and the Leading Researcher of Higher Education in the Faculty of Education, Psychology and Art, University of Latvia. Her expertise and research interests include quality assurance in higher education, the student-centered study process, the professional development of academic staff and the implications of higher education policy in the study process. Davide de Gennaro is an Assistant Professor of Organization Studies at the University of Salerno. He also works as Temporary Professor at the Italian National School of Administration in Rome and as a Contract Researcher at the SDA Bocconi School of Management in Milan in Italy. Miroslav Dopita works as an Associate Professor of Sociology and Adult Education at the Palacký University, Olomouc, Czech Republic. He specializes in adult education, sociology of education and work. Kata Fredheim is an Associate Professor at the Stockholm School of Economics in Riga and a Research Associate at Baltic International Centre for Economic Policy Studies. She is an anthropologist, with a Ph.D. in Education. Some key areas of her research interest are (higher) education, mobility, migration studies and gender and leadership.

viii    About the Contributors Daiga Kalniņa is an Assistant Professor in the Faculty of Pedagogy, Psychology and Art, University of Latvia. Her research interests cover technologies in the teaching–learning process, didactics and the teaching–learning process in science. Maximiliano E. Korstanje is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Palermo, Buenos Aires Argentina. He is a Book Series Editor of Advances in Hospitality, Tourism and Service Industries (IGI Global, US) and Tourism Security Safety and Post-conflict Destinations (Emerald Group, UK). Nikos Koutsoupias is an Associate Professor of Applied Informatics and Data Analysis, Head of the Governance and ICT Lab, International and European Studies Department, University of Macedonia, Thessaloniki, Greece. He teaches computing and data analysis courses. His main research interests include multivariate analysis methods, unstructured data analysis techniques, art analytics and computer-assisted career guidance. Marija Krumina is a Research Fellow at Baltic International Centre for Economic Policy Studies. The key areas of her research interest are entrepreneurship, higher education, mobility and gender studies. Angela Lehr is a licensed counselor, educator and leadership consultant with expertise in mental health, grief, trauma, humanistic leadership and creating cultures of care in education. She obtained her Ed.D. in Interdisciplinary Leadership from Creighton University in May 2022. Francesca Loia is a Research Fellow at the Department of Economics, Management and Institutions – University of Naples “Federico II”. She is an author of many international scientific publications. In the past, she served as Visiting Scholar at the American College of Greece. Miltiadis D. Lytras, Ph.D., is an expert in Advanced Computer Science and Management, Editor, Lecturer and Research Consultant, with extensive experience in academia and the business sector in Europe and Asia. He is a Visiting Professor at Effat University and a Distinguished Scientist at the King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. He is a world-class expert in the fields of cognitive computing, information systems, technology enabled innovation, social networks, computers in human behavior and knowledge management. Radosław Malik, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor at SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Institute of International Studies, International Political Economy Department. He is the initiator of the SGH Young Scientist program series. His research interests include offshoring and outsourcing, the labor market, megatrends, innovation in services and science mapping analysis. Anna Moni is a full-time lecturer, instructional designer and faculty trainer at Deree – The American College of Greece. Her research interests include language

About the Contributors    ix teaching and learning pedagogy, assessment and feedback design, technologyenhanced teaching and learning and effective feedback in higher education. She authored/co-authored textbooks for Italian language learning, and book chapters in peer-reviewed publications. Dita Nıˉmante is a Professor and Leading Researcher at the Scientific Institute of Pedagogy, Faculty of Education, Psychology and Art, University of Latvia. Her main research interests entail inclusive education, classroom management and the professional development of preservice teachers and teachers for inclusive education and classroom management. Alise Oļesika is a Scientific Assistant at the Scientific Institute of Pedagogy, Faculty of Education, Psychology and Art, University of Latvia. She is a Doctoral student on the Educational Sciences study program. Her research interests include social innovations in higher education and education for sustainable development. Aikaterini Papakota is a Psychologist, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Master’s degree in Social and Clinical Psychology and a PgDip in Counseling and Vocational Guidance. She has more than 20 years of experience in providing career counseling for students, adults and NEETs. She is also keen on research and evaluation of career interventions to ensure sustainable development of both people’s career and society’s growth. Ioanna Papavassiliou-Alexiou is a Professor in Lifelong Career Guidance and Counseling, Educational and Social Policy Department, School of Social Sciences, Humanities and Arts, University of Macedonia, Thessaloniki, Greece. Her research interests focus on lifelong guidance and counseling, career and professional development, Career Management Skills development and educational and vocational inclusion of disadvantaged groups. Christian Pauletto is an Associate Professor at the International University in Geneva. From 1990 to 2018, he was a Swiss negotiator with responsibilities in an array of positions in foreign economic affairs. He negotiated onsite and online, at multilateral and bilateral levels. He imparts negotiating seminars and workshops. Lucie Rohlíková has focused on the use of technologies in education since 1998, and has been publishing her work on higher education continuously since then. She is leading the Quality Division and teaching at the Faculty of Education at the University of West Bohemia, Pilsen, Czech Republic. Michał Siczek is a graduate student in Accounting and Finance, SGH Warsaw School of Economics and a participant in the SGH Young Scientist program series. His research interests include financial reporting, accounting and financial analysis.

x    About the Contributors Andrea Sojková works as a Strategic Development Analyst at the Palacký University, Olomouc, Czech Republic. She specializes in the analysis of higher education data. Zane Varpina is an Associate Professor at the Stockholm School of Economics in Riga and a Research Associate at Baltic International Centre for Economic Policy Studies. She holds a Doctoral degree in Demography. The key areas of her research interest are secondary schools and their graduates, higher education graduates, skills in labor market and adult education in training. Susie Vaughan is an ICF Professional Certified Coach and consultant with expertise in public education, leadership development and humanistic leadership. She collaborates with individuals, teams and organizations in strategic learning partnerships which move them toward the future they envision. Anna Visvizi, Ph.D. (dr hab.), political scientist and economist, editor, researcher and political consultant with extensive experience in academia, think-tank and government sectors. Her expertise covers issues pertinent to the intersection of politics, economics and information and communication technology. Her executive and managerial experience are employed to boost teamwork, fairness, transparency and excellence in research. She is an Associate Professor at SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Warsaw, Poland and a Visiting Professor at Effat University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Vít Zouhar is Composer, Musicologist, Professor of Music and Vice-rector for Study and Education at the Palacký University, Olomouc, Czech Republic. He is the author of the operas (e.g., Coronide, Noci dnem and with T. Hanzlík Torso, La Dafne), and he has written orchestral, chamber and electro-acoustical works. Christina Zourna is a Mathematician. She has an M.A. in Adult Education and is a Ph.D. Researcher in Educational and Social Policy Department, School of Social Sciences, Humanities and Arts, University of Macedonia, Thessaloniki, Greece. She has been teaching secondary education Mathematics since 1988. Her research interests include the use of Drama in Education in personal, social and professional skills development for teenagers, students and adults. Alejandra Zuccoli is a Professor of the University of Palermo, Argentina and the University of Salvador, Argentina. She is the Director of the Joy Labs at the University of Palermo, Argentina. Professor Zuccolli was awarded the Innovator of Method (ALTAX) award for improving hospitality by applying neuromarketing tools to education.

Preface

This book derives from the understanding that institutions, including higher education institutions (HEIs), may use crises as an opportunity to develop, to transform and to improve their institutional resilience. The Covid-19 pandemic is an instance of a crisis. The pandemic, the related to it levels of morbidity and the resulting restrictions to mobility, forced HEIs to switch to remote learning overnight. At that time the scale and the scope of the challenge seemed to be beyond the capacity of several HEIs around the world. Gradually however, through trial and error, the majority of the HEIs moved to remote learning, not only changing the basics of their operation, but also restoring one of most important pillars of stability of modern societies, that is, the education system. Today, that the worst of the pandemic is over, HEIs around the world successfully implement several novel innovative practices that were acquired during the pandemic. This includes technology-enhanced approaches to teaching and learning as well as a set of managerial practices related to it. It is argued therefore that Covid-19 served as one of the most important push factors for the HEIs to redesign their approaches to teaching and learning, thereby also to rethink their business model. In this process, substantial changes in the organizational culture have taken place. This book explores this multifaceted issue. While so doing, this book makes a case for restoring the emphasis on the faculty and on education. HEIs are meant to educate the students, not merely to teach. We would like to thank all contributing authors for sharing their work with us and for their patience as their chapters were reviewed, edited, resubmitted, and made ready for publication. It is perhaps these moments of collaboration, which are the most creative and, ultimately, the most satisfying in academic life. A sense of community emerges, based on trust, commitment, and willingness to make the world a better place. The Publisher, Emerald Publishing, always supportive, is a part of the community. We would like to thank the entire Emerald team, and especially the Senior Editor, Kim Chadwick, for her professionalism and kindness. The Editors, Anna Visvizi Miltiadis D. Lytras Haifa Jamal Al-Lail

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 1

To Educate, Not Simply to Teach: Higher Education Institutions Post-Covid-19 Anna Visvizi, Miltiadis D. Lytras and Haifa Jamal Al-Lail Abstract Institutions, including higher education institutions (HEIs), may use crises as an opportunity to develop, to transform and to improve their institutional resilience. Indeed, the Covid-19 pandemic proves that a vast majority of HEIs around the world effectively adapted to the circumstances of the pandemic and successfully embarked on remote learning. The analysis of HEIs proves as well that the nearly overnight switch to remote learning was but one aspect of the quiet transformation that HEIs worldwide were subdued to. In this context, this chapter identifies the administrative practices, including talent management, operations management, and above all, the organizational culture. The notion of changed expectations on the part of the faculty and the students is highlighted. The key point that this chapter makes is that the faculty and the art of education, rather than simply teaching, need to be placed first if HEIs are to retain their resilience. Keywords: Covid-19; higher education institutions (HEIs); faculty; education; technology-enhanced learning (TEL); society To educate, not simply to teach

1. Introduction This book derives from the understanding that institutions, including HEIs may use crises as an opportunity to develop, to transform and to improve their resilience (Sia & Abbas Adamu, 2021; Sihag & Dhoopar, 2022). The Covid-19

Moving Higher Education Beyond Covid-19: Innovative and Technology-Enhanced Approaches to Teaching and Learning, 1–10 Copyright © 2023 by Anna Visvizi, Miltiadis D. Lytras and Haifa Jamal Al-Lail Published under exclusive licence by Emerald Publishing Limited doi:10.1108/978-1-80382-517-520231001

2    Anna Visvizi et al. pandemic represents such as crisis. That is, at the beginning of the pandemic, when the levels of morbidity and harsh restrictions to mobility forced HEIs to switch to remote learning overnight (Daniela & Visvizi, 2021), the scale and scope of the challenge seemed to go beyond the capacity of several HEIs around the world. Gradually however, through trial and error, the majority of the HEIs around the world successfully adopted a variety of solutions enabling the faculty and the students to continue the processes of teaching and learning (Bokayev, Torebekova, Abdykalikova, & Davletbayeva, 2021; Johnson, Roberto, & Rauhaus, 2021; Sciarrone & Temperini, 2021). By so doing, a substantial, even if quiet, reform of the HEIs’ modes of operation was introduced, and a major change in organizational culture took place. The Covid-19 pandemic caused a stir in HEIs. The challenge included the scope and ways of institutional adaptation, especially the administrative process (cf. Treve, 2021). Notably, under conditions of strain related to Covid-19 related absences from work, the (wo)manpower of HEIs was substantially diminished. In this context, HEIs would also have to navigate safety issues at work, including the rotation of administrative staff. The notion of the adoption of technology to facilitate remote learning constituted another pressing issue (Adedoyin & Soykan, 2020; Kidwell, 2021). The key issues at stake were to secure resources, to make the optimal choice of the remote learning platform, to facilitate the faculty to effectively employ the technology-enhanced tools, and to make students able to follow. Here issues as basic as internet access, the quality of the internet connection, and the availability of devices, i.e., laptop, PC, tablet, would frequently come up to the surface as major challenges. Several other issues emerged too. On the one hand, the Covid-19 pandemic and the need to teach remotely prompted the question of how to deliver the course content to students in general, i.e., not only under crisis situation. On the other hand, the realization that that remote teaching and learning grant flexibility and efficiency gains, e.g., time, have had a lasting impact on all stakeholders’ perception of onsite versus online modes of working. For faculty engaged in research, the flexibility and time-gain related to working remotely creates the opportunity to conduct research on a daily basis, and thus not only on weekends and holidays. It allows for attending conferences. However, it also allows balancing life and work; somehow. From a different vantage point, the Covid-19 related restrictions to mobility and the resulting isolation, loneliness, detachment grief, that the students, the faculty, and the administration experienced (Lehr & Vaughan, 2021), have shed new light on the salience of socializing and community building through … being together. Against this backdrop, a “new normal” consolidates in HEIs today. It is important that the lessons learnt during the pandemic are not unlearned. This book suggests how to do just that.

2. The Context and the Book’s Relevance Today, that the worst of the pandemic is over, HEIs around the world successfully implement several novel innovative practices that were acquired during the pandemic. This includes technology-enhanced approaches to teaching and learning.

To Educate, Not Simply to Teach    3 However, it also includes the set of managerial practices related to the process of facilitating and administering diverse forms of technology-enhanced learning (TEL). It is argued therefore that Covid-19 served as one of the most important push factors for the HEIs to redesign their approaches to teaching and learning, and thereby also rethink their business model. This book derives from the understanding that more research is needed to explore this issue in greater detail. It is important to understand in which ways the outstanding degree of institutional change that the HEIs underwent impacts all stakeholders, i.e., the administration, the faculty, and the students. It is important to understand how the traumatic experience of the pandemic influences the stakeholders’ perceptions of HEIs. In this context, the curious question is how the faculty, and the students conceive of teaching and learning. This includes questions not only of the mode of the course content delivery (cf. Zogheib & Daniela, 2021), but also of the actual content delivered and the skills emulated onto students. Admittedly, the faculty, especially those faculty members who are actively engaged in research, consulting work and publications, may have a whole new set of ideas of what really matters and what does not. Similarly, the students – marked with the experience of the pandemic – view the world differently than before and, hence, their priorities have changed (cf. Dhar, Ayittey, & Sarkar, 2020; Lehr & Vaughan, 2021). The challenge is to make the faculty and the students to engage in a conversation, while also allowing each of them grow, excel, and flourish, professionally and personally (Ahmad, Muazzam, Anjum, Visvizi, & Nawaz, 2020). Against this backdrop, the objective of this book is to reflect on the Covid-19 pandemic as a moment of growth and adaptation through crisis. However, this book also wants to be clear about the fact that not all institutional innovation is to be related to the Covid-19 pandemic. HEIs, due to creativity, experience, and knowledge of the faculty, have always been the cradles of innovation. If uninhibited by narrowmindedness, politicking and bullying (cf. Hodgins & McNamara, 2019; Muazzam, Anjum, & Visvizi, 2020), the faculty, especially faculty also engaged in research, is the harbinger of HEIs’ growth. It is the values, the commitment, and the example that these faculty members set that constitute the fabric of HEIs. The objective of HEIs is to educate, not merely to teach.

3. Review of the Chapter’s Content The chapters included in this book address several topics pertaining to challenges HEIs had to face during the pandemic and to lessons learnt in course of Covid-19. These topics include the very notion of innovation in teaching and learning in HEIs and the imperative of quality education (cf. Loia et al., 2016; Visvizi, Daniela, & Chen, 2020); innovation in teaching and learning driven by the circumstances of the global Covid-19 pandemic; and lessons that can be drawn from the period of adaptation and change driven in HEIs by the Covid-19 pandemic. The book has been divided into three parts. Part 1 (Chapters 2–4) offers an insight into the broad question of emergencies, adaptation and the imperative of quality education as seen through the lens of the pandemic. Part 2 (Chapters 5–7) elaborates on lessons the Covid-19 pandemic has taught us. The chapters included in

4    Anna Visvizi et al. Part 3 (Chapters 8–11) focus on the day to come, i.e., on how to conceive of HEIs in the post-Covid world. Specifically, Chapter 2, authored by Radosław Malik and Michał Siczek, titled “HEIs in Times of Covid-19: A Bibliometric Analysis of Key Research Themes,” applies science mapping analysis (SciMat) and literature review as research methods to examine literature about HEIs during the Covid-19 pandemic. User acceptance, satisfaction, and perception were identified as the most productive research themes in the sample of 561 Web of Science (WoS) indexed articles about HEIs during the pandemic. The literature review of the top themes reveals that user acceptance is influenced by the perceived usefulness of online learning and ease of using online tools. The level of satisfaction among students in online learning is relatively high and linked with the perceived benefits of online courses. Conditions influencing user acceptance and perceived satisfaction differ between students and lecturers. Technology-related themes appeared to be relatively under-researched as standalone themes, but technological aspects turned out to be important components of the most prolific research themes identified. In Chapter 3, titled “Online Teaching in HEIs Versus Online International Negotiation: Analogies and Transferable Good Practices,” a seasoned diplomat Christian Pauletto, makes a case that the concept of innovation should not be reduced to its technological dimension but encompasses the whole context of its deployment and implementation. Regardless of technology, an innovation may be successful or not depending on how well its implementation suits each single context. In the case of education, this consists to a sizeable extent in a communicational and interpersonal context. The hypothesis of this piece is that maintaining optimal communication between participants is a key factor of success of new online teaching methods. Given that in this regard, there are similarities between negotiating practice and teaching practice, it is worth examining whether good practices developed in online international negotiation are transferable to online teaching. The chapter identifies a number of practices from online negotiation that perform well in online teaching. It focuses on communicational aspects, mutual understanding (monitoring and optimization of understanding), motivation to listen, attention, active participation, and non-verbal communication. Online teaching and online negotiation share another common feature: some unresolved challenges are common to both disciplines. This should also be taken into account when migrating educational programmes online. The research is informed by the author’s first-hand experience from practice in both international diplomatic negotiation and academic teaching. In Chapter 4, written by Zuccoli Alejandra and Maximiliano E. Korstanje, and titled “PANCOE: A Fresh Alternative to Post-Covid-19 Challenges in Education: The Case of Tourism Education,” the cases of tourism industry and tourism education during and after the pandemic are discussed. The restrictive measures disposed by governments generated not only an unparalleled economic crisis but also serious social maladies in society and education (i.e., higher dropout rates and low academic grades). Needless to say, tourism education was in crisis much time earlier than the Covid-19 pandemic. Covid-19 introduced a new opportunity to reform the epistemology and the basis of the tourism education curricula.

To Educate, Not Simply to Teach    5 Centered on the role played by pleasure and joy, which is boosted by the digital technologies, the present book chapter synthesizes the findings of PANCOE, a successful experiment conducted by the University of Palermo, Argentina, to reduce the dropout rates whilst improving students’ academic performance. The experiment was drawn and applied in the years before and after the pandemic. Results show how pleasure plays a vital role giving students better opportunities in contexts of fear and deprivation. The authors of Chapter 5, i.e., Daiga Kalniņa, Dita Nīmante, Sanita Baranova and Alise Oļesika, explore the question of the opportunities pertaining to remote learning during the Covid-19 pandemic. As the authors observe, Covid-19 forced the entire global education system to adapt to the new circumstances. This chapter continues the worldwide discussion on how student learning on courses and programs that were moved partially online due to remote teaching and learning in HEIs during the Covid-19 pandemic was assured and what opportunities this has brought to higher education. Although there is a tendency in the theoretical literature to focus on the problems, difficulties, and challenges associated with the transition to remote learning in higher education during the pandemic, our study suggests that, contrary to the common belief, students actually identify a great number of positive issues associated with remote learning. The findings of the study highlight that students see both personal benefits and challenges in remote learning. Overall, students are satisfied with the quality of the remote teaching and learning process, and students’ positive assessment of the quality of their studies’ organization increased with age. Stability and routine were important for the students in the study process. These ensure that the study process continues uninterrupted and thus that results can be achieved. The results of the study bring us to the conclusion that the Covid-19 pandemic could be used to speed up changes in HEIs around the globe to find better and more student-centered and innovative solutions in teaching and learning in the future. In Chapter 6, titled “Life Career Skills Development in Higher Education Due to Covid-19: A Multivariate Approach to Students’ Perceptions,” by Ioanna Papavassiliou-Alexiou, Christina Zourna, Nikos Koutsoupias and Aikaterini Papakota, the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the course of studies and life career skills’ development of undergraduate students are examined. By focusing on the case of the University of Macedonia, a mid-sized public Greek University, the authors investigate how the students, first-hand experienced the unexpected changes from face-to-face on campus to synchronous online education during the lockdown and how they coped with these changes. Change is considered and described as a main component within current life and career trajectories addressing chaotic and unpredictable circumstances while Chaos Theory of Careers offers the theoretical background of the chapter. The research followed the mixed methods paradigm: a multilevel embedded sequential explanatory design including a participant selection model and multivariate data analysis methods. A survey (N = 621) was conducted; individual interviews and focus groups’ discussions further explained the quantitative findings. The emerging clusters of students revealed similarities in feelings, motivation, adaptation, and life career skills development. The first cluster comprised of older, digitally high-skilled students,

6    Anna Visvizi et al. with the required technological equipment, adaptable to change, self-regulated, strongly in favor of synchronous online education; in the second cluster were grouped the younger, digitally medium-skilled students, who regularly participated in both modalities, critically recognized the advantages of either one, feeling strongly in favor of a combination; finally, the third cluster included digitally medium-skilled students who found serious difficulty in using online platforms, dissatisfied with social isolation and distant interaction, strongly preferring face-to-face instruction, valuing direct physical contact, social connection, and networking. In Chapter 7, authored by Francesca Loia and Davide de Gennaro, action learning during the Covid-19 pandemic is examined. By focusing on the case of Italy, the authors argue that over the past years, the educational environment has undergone a revolution, caused mainly by the wide diffusion of information and communication technologies (ICTs), and the multi-scalar implications of the Covid-19 pandemic. This chapter taps into educators’ first-hand experience relating to the adoption of online technologies in an action learning process during the pandemic. Action learning is one of the experiential training methodologies aimed at individual, group, and organizational growth and development through practical, hands-on experience. It is an educational process that facilitates and improves the mechanism and functioning of groups of people who come together to support real challenges or activities, also by learning from direct experience. To this end, the case study of a University Master Course in leadership and change management is examined, based on unstructured interviews and analysis of written documents. The case study represents an emblematic case of adaptation and response to the change imposed by Covid-19 through the promotion of an innovative teaching and learning method. Results show how the adjustments devised to cope with the consequence of teamwork virtualization proved to be synergistic, delivering positive outcomes in terms of participants’ satisfaction, learning and impact, and producing deeply innovative change management projects. Implications for theory and practice are discussed. Chapter 8, titled “Enabling Students’ Uptake of Feedback,” written by Anna Moni the challenge of students’ ability to use feedback they receive is examined. As the author explains, in light of a new paradigm to feedback, the focus shifts from how and when instructors deliver feedback to how the learning environment and the feedback practices sustain agentic behavior on feedback. Feedback produces learning if the students are given the opportunity to use and to act on it, and thus to move forward. Ample research on innovative models and designs for feedback and assessment in higher education courses exists. However, a one-sizefits-all model does not exist. Each university setting represents a unique case, and hence the replicability of a model is impossible. This poses a challenge for innovative HEIs that consider the promotion of students’ agency on feedback a distinguishing attribute for their learning experience onsite, and in the Covid-19 inflicted transition to remote instruction. This study used content analysis to investigate how feedback and assessment feedback design, in the online component of a blended course in English for Academic Purposes, can sustain opportunities for feedback encounters and enable student uptake of feedback. After exploring the

To Educate, Not Simply to Teach    7 process of assessment and feedback design, different agents of the course and potential feedback encounters were mapped and analyzed in a sociocultural perspective. An established matrix of feedback for learning was used to investigate and code the feedback encounters generated in the course. The results of the content analysis indicated satisfactory student uptake of feedback and opportunities for potential feedback encounters before, during, and after the assessment. Additionally, the results pointed to the need for more feedforward and self-regulatory commentaries. The “Implications of the Covid-19 Pandemic on High School Graduates Plans and Education Path” are elaborated by Zane Varpina, Kata Fredheim and Marija Krumina in Chapter 9. As the authors observe, over the period 2020–2021 Latvian schools experienced one of the longest closure periods in Europe. Hence, Covid-19 significantly impacted high school pupils, especially those graduating in 2021, i.e., half of the secondary school programme they acquired was delivered remotely. Their learning and social experiences are distinct from that of previous cohorts. The findings are directly relevant for HEIs to further adapt to the background and needs of this student cohort. To examine this cohort’s experience, this chapter empirically examines adolescents at the point of their graduation from high school to learn what impact the pandemic has had on their quality education and plans. The findings provide insight into how they evaluate the remote studies and their knowledge, how they perceive their mental state, and what disruption to plans it has caused. We learn that most students found remote studies more difficult than onsite learning and associate it with lack of knowledge behind the grades earned. They have experienced lack of motivation and miss real-life communication with their friends, even though they occasionally admit not breaking lockdown rules and meeting peers. The most common concern among graduates is lost opportunities they would otherwise have, however, we also notice impressive resilience when they imply that the pandemic has opened new opportunities that otherwise would not be possible, along with self-development and character growth. Overall, the stress level for adolescents was moderate to high. Covid-19 has caused disruptions to plans, some more like opportunities others like limitations. The insights may provide understanding to how these students require a very different approach from educators and staff alike. HEIs have the opportunity to adapt and innovate, to custom the content of studies and communication form to the diverse incoming generations. In Chapter 10, titled “The Pandemic Experience as a New Challenge for Public Czech Universities,” the authors, i.e., Miroslav Dopita, Lucie Rohlíková, Andrea Sojková and Vít Zouhar, focus on the case of the Czech universities and the pandemic. It is argued that prior to 2020, the Czech HEIs did not have much experience with distance learning and blended learning. Experience with hybrid teaching was minimal. The Covid-19 pandemic therefore presented the management of public universities in the Czech Republic with a number of new tasks in resolving the crisis situation. It also made the possibilities of distance education and other flexible forms of education significantly more visible. In 2021, a total of 26 public universities joined together in a central development project, in order to discuss the most important issues of distance education and blended learning,

8    Anna Visvizi et al. the current background for the implementation of flexible forms of education, and also their future plans in this area. In this chapter, we present in detail the results of a study on the background of public universities for the implementation of distance education and blended learning, which have become the basis for creating the action plans of individual institutions. The results of the analysis showed, among other things, online supported education is important, especially in emergency situations. The book ends with a very eloquent Chapter 11 on “Humanistic Leadership and Its Enduring Legacy in a Post-Covid-19 World.” The authors, Angela Lehr and Susie Vaughan, stress that as societies worldwide continue to navigate and recover from the impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic, the world is at a unique crossroads. How can leaders in HEIs prioritize holistic human needs and maximize interpersonal and collegial human connection, while continuing to guide and grow successful learning communities both in-person and virtually? With potential costs and benefits in mind, pertinent literature is reviewed, and the limitations and silver linings presented by the ongoing pandemic are explored. Different forms of grief and loss experienced by faculty and students as well as the effects of technostress amid this time of change are also recognized. Concepts and practices introduced by prominent humanistic thought-leaders are discussed as a way to navigate the educational impacts created by the pandemic. A key finding presented is that leaders and HEIs that prioritize human connections and relationships, in concert with adopting technological advancements, are better equipped to maintain personal well-being while enhancing academic success in the long term. By fostering learning environments based on psychological safety, compassion, autonomy, and adaptability, humanistic leaders contribute to the betterment of HEIs as a whole. To this end, the enduring legacy of humanistic leadership is pivotal in this new era of global and individual humanistic transformation amid change.

4. Final Remarks This book offers an insight into the vast question of adaptation and change in HEIs in the post-Covid world. The value added of this book is threefold, i.e., first and foremost, this book goes beyond reporting on the Covid-19 pandemic by placing the pandemic in the broader societal and institutional contexts. Indeed, the chapters included in this book offer a detailed insight into how the pandemic influenced the students, the faculty and the HEIs. Second, this book focuses on adaptation and change in HEIs as a function of an overall innovative capacity of HEIs, whereby approaches to teaching and learning form the thrust of that capacity. Notably, the chapters included in this book suggest how the teaching and learning process can be improved, either by a more effective uptake of feedback or by employing techniques from, e.g., international negotiations. Third, this book offers a critical appraisal of lessons learnt throughout the pandemic and their legacy in the post-Covid world. Here the questions of career choices, matching teaching methods to developments in the industry and other are explored. More research is needed to explore and uncover the lasting impact of the pandemic on HEIs and its stakeholders, i.e., the faculty, the

To Educate, Not Simply to Teach    9 students, the institutions and the society at large. The key point that this book sought to convey is that whatever we do, education should be our goal, not simply teaching.

References Adedoyin, O. B., & Soykan, E. (2020). Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: The challenges and opportunities. Interactive Learning Environments. doi: 10.1080/10494820. 2020.1813180 Ahmad, M., Muazzam, A., Anjum, A., Visvizi, A., & Nawaz, R. (2020). Linking workfamily conflict (WFC) and talent management: Insights from a developing country. Sustainability, 12, 2861. doi: 10.3390/su12072861 Bokayev, B., Torebekova, Z., Abdykalikova, M., & Davletbayeva, Z. (2021), Exposing policy gaps: The experience of Kazakhstan in implementing distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 15(2), 275–290. doi:10.1108/TG-07-2020-0147 Daniela, L., & Visvizi, A. (Eds.) (2021). Remote learning in times of pandemic. London: Routledge. Retrieved from https://www.routledge.com/Remote-Learning-in-Timesof-Pandemic-Issues-Implications-and-Best-Practice/Daniela-Visvizi/p/book/ 9780367765705 Dhar, B. K., Ayittey, F. K., & Sarkar, S. M. (2020). Impact of COVID-19 on psychology among the university students. Global Challenges, 4, 2000038. doi:10.1002/gch2. 202000038 Hodgins, M., & McNamara, P. M. (2019). An enlightened environment? Workplace bullying and incivility in Irish Higher Education. SAGE Open. doi:10.1177/2158244019894278 Johnson, A. F., Roberto, K. J., & Rauhaus, B. M. (2021). Policies, politics and pandemics: Course delivery method for US higher educational institutions amid COVID-19. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 15(2), 291–303. doi: 10.1108/ TG-07-2020-0158 Kidwell, K. D. (2021). The challenges educators face in virtually creating high quality LMX with students and colleagues. In A. Visvizi, O. Troisi, & K. Saeedi (Eds.), Research and Innovation Forum 2021. RIIFORUM 2021. Springer Proceedings in Complexity. Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-84311-3_20 Lehr, A., & Vaughan, S. (2021). Grief, growth, and silver linings: Humanistic leadership during the Covid-19 pandemic. In A. Visvizi, O. Troisi, & K. Saeedi (Eds.), Research and Innovation Forum 2021. RIIFORUM 2021. Springer Proceedings in Complexity. Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-84311-3_54 Loia, V., Maione, G., Tommasetti, A., Torre, C., Troisi, O., & Botti, A. (2016). Toward smart value co-education. In V. Uskov, R. Howlett, & L. Jain (Eds.), Smart Education and e-Learning 2016. Smart innovation, systems and technologies (Vol. 59). Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-39690-3_6 Muazzam, A., Anjum, A., & Visvizi, A. (2020). Problem-focused coping strategies, workplace bullying, and sustainability of HEIs. Sustainability, 12, 10565. doi: 10.3390/ su122410565 Sciarrone, F., & Temperini, M. (2021). Monitoring massive open online courses (MOOC) during the Covid-19 pandemic. In A. Visvizi, O. Troisi, & K. Saeedi (Eds.), Research and Innovation Forum 2021. RIIFORUM 2021. Springer proceedings in complexity. Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-84311-3_14 Sia, J. K.-M., & Abbas Adamu, A. (2021). Facing the unknown: Pandemic and higher education in Malaysia. Asian Education and Development Studies, 10(2), 263–275. doi: 10.1108/AEDS-05-2020-0114

10    Anna Visvizi et al. Sihag, P., & Dhoopar, A. (2022). Organizational resilience and employee performance: The mediation of perceived organizational support in the Indian HEIs. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management. doi: 10.1108/IJPPM-07-20210387 Treve, M. (2021). What COVID-19 has introduced into education: Challenges Facing Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). Higher Education Pedagogies, 6(1), 212–227. doi: 10.1080/23752696.2021.1951616 Visvizi, A., Daniela, L., & Chen, Ch. W. (2020, June). Beyond the ICT- and sustainability hypes: A case for quality education. Computers in Human Behavior, 107. doi: 10.1016/ j.chb.2020.106304 Zogheib, B., & Daniela, L. (2021). Students’ perception of cell phones effect on their academic performance: A Latvian and a Middle Eastern University Cases. Tech Know Learn. doi: 10.1007/s10758-021-09515-4

Part 1

Emergencies, Adaptation and the Imperative of Quality Education

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 2

HEIs in Times of Covid-19: A Bibliometric Analysis of Key Research Themes Radosław Malik and Michał Siczek Abstract This chapter applies science mapping analysis (SciMat) and literature review as research methods to examine literature about higher education institutions (HEIs) during the Covid-19 pandemic. User acceptance, satisfaction, and perception are identified as the most productive research themes in the sample of 561 Web of Science (WoS) indexed articles about HEIs during the pandemic. The literature review of the top themes reveals that user acceptance is influenced by the perceived usefulness of online learning and ease of using online tools. The level of satisfaction among students in online learning is relatively high and linked with the perceived benefits of online courses. Conditions influencing user acceptance and perceived satisfaction differ between students and lecturers. Technologyrelated themes appeared to be relatively under-researched as standalone themes, but technological aspects turned out to be important components of the most prolific research themes identified. Keywords: HEIs; Covid-19; bibliometric analysis; science mapping; SciMat; ICT

1. Introduction HEIs have been considerably affected by the Covid-19 pandemic and the scope and depth of the impact, including longer-lasting repercussions, are being subjected to urgent analyses (Daniela & Visvizi, 2021) that have considerable research value and paramount practical implications (Neuwirth, Jović, & Mukherji, 2020).

Moving Higher Education Beyond Covid-19: Innovative and Technology-Enhanced Approaches to Teaching and Learning, 13–28 Copyright © 2023 by Radosław Malik and Michał Siczek Published under exclusive licence by Emerald Publishing Limited doi:10.1108/978-1-80382-517-520231002

14    Radosław Malik and Michał Siczek Faced with lockdowns and extraordinary regulations, HEIs responded to the emergency by rolling out various measures that affected students (Shahzad, Hassan, Aremu, Hussain, & Lodhi, 2021), lectures (Bento et al., 2021), and which required considerable organisational change (Camilleri, 2021) and technological upgrades (Abu Talib, Bettayeb, & Omer, 2021) amid the shift to online learning (Johnson, Roberto, & Rauhaus, 2021). The actions undertaken by HEIs during the pandemic have had a complex and multifaceted influence on a number of areas fundamental to these institutions, including the quality of education (Camilleri, 2021), teaching methods and strategies (Mahmood, 2021), students’ expectations (Cicha, Rizun, Rutecka, & Strzelecki, 2021), and the financial standing of HEIs (Jung, Horta, & Postiglione, 2021). It has been shown that this extraordinary situation triggered the use of modern online-learning tools on an extraordinary scale (Visvizi, Daniela, & Chen, 2020) and was also the source of an unprecedented wave of innovation that is expected to shape HEIs in the years after the Covid-19 pandemic wanes (Sá & Serpa, 2020), augmenting the previously identified trends of the growing role of IT in HEIs (Visvizi, Lytras, & Sarirete, 2019). The significant research value and considerable application potential that can be promptly utilized in the HEI environment requires new insight from the earlystage research on the intersection between HEIs and the pandemic to identify major research streams and outline future research directions. This chapter is a response to this need by mapping the key research themes in the literature about HEIs during the pandemic, with the application of a SciMat and a literature review to address two research questions: Q1: What are the key research themes about HEIs during Covid-19? Q2: What is the insight from articles about the most researched themes regarding HEIs and Covid-19? The remainder of this chapter is structured as follows. The method, analytical tools applied, and research limitations are elaborated in Section 2. The results of SciMat are presented in Section 3. Section 4 discusses the insight from the papers in the most significant themes identified as the outcome of SciMat. Conclusions follow.

2. Science Mapping: Method, Method Limitations, Sampling SciMat is applied in this study as a primary research method and its results are supplemented with the use of a literature review as a secondary research method. SciMat is a type of bibliometric analysis that enables a visualization of the research themes and connections between them in a given research field represented by the selected set of research articles. Therefore, SciMat provides quantitative insight into the structure of the research field. In particular, it shows the avenues of research that have been most frequently explored by researchers thus far. Moreover, by indicating absent themes and underdeveloped connections

HEIs in Times of Covid-19    15 between existing themes, it signals potential research gaps and supports future research (Chen, 2017). SciMat utilizes various bibliometric data attached to research articles. In this research, our analysis is based on keywords co-occurrence because an article’s keywords are set to indicate the content of the research text. SciMat based on keywords co-occurrence investigates the frequency of the appearance of keyword pairs within the scope of the research (Su & Lee, 2010). Therefore, it provides insight into the structure and magnitude of the connections between various keywords in the research field. The result can be viewed as a graphic representation (or map, hence science mapping) of the research themes and their relations within the research field. The SciMat carried out in this study uses two analytical tools: strategic diagram and thematic network. The thematic network is a visualization of the theme represented by the major keyword displayed in the center of the graph together with its connections with other keywords that frequently occur together. The keywords are shown as spheres whose size is proportional to the number of articles where the given keyword was used. The thickness of the lines between keyword spheres in the thematic network is proportional to the number of co-occurrences of the connected keywords (Santana & Cobo, 2020). An example of a thematic network for the hypothetical theme “R” and six other keywords is shown in Fig. 1. A strategic diagram is a visual representation of themes plotted according to their centrality and density. The centrality measures the degree of interaction of a theme with all other themes in the diagram, whereas density assesses the strength of its thematic network (Callon, Courtial, & Laville, 1991). Consequently, centrality can be considered a proxy for theme importance in the research field and density provides insight about the internal development of the theme. The assessment of the centrality and density of the themes allows their distribution into four groups of themes: motor, basic, specialized, and emerging/declining themes based on their positions in the strategic diagram (Gutiérrez-Salcedo, Martínez, Moral-Muñoz, Herrera-Viedma, & Cobo, 2018), as shown in Fig. 2. Motor themes that are characterized by high centrality and density are considered the most important in the research field as they indicate themes that are welldeveloped internally and well-connected externally with other themes significant

Fig. 1.  Thematic Network (Example). Source: The authors.

16    Radosław Malik and Michał Siczek

Fig. 2.  Strategic Diagram (Example). Source: The authors. in the research field. Specialized themes are relatively well-developed internally, but they lack strong connections with other themes identified as vital in the research field, therefore they represent isolated research avenues. Basic themes are mature in terms of their connectivity with other themes as indicated by high centrality, but they are short of internal development as revealed by their low density. Emerging and declining themes are scarcely connected with other themes and their thematic networks remain nascent (Santana & Cobo, 2020). This may imply that there are ascending themes that are novel in the research field or that the attention of scholars is decreasing and could be considered abandoned research avenues. Their unambiguous attribution to one of these groups would require the application of an additional science mapping tool (evolution map) but in relatively novel research fields it is more likely to consider themes with low centrality and density as emerging themes rather than declining ones. SciMat based on keywords co-occurrence is a largely automated process that in its full application consists of six steps: (I) data search, (II) data refinement, (III) standardization and network creation, (IV) map creation, (V) analysis and visualization, and (VI) performance analysis. The data search phase is performed via queries of databases that contain scientific articles (typically WoS and Scopus) and their bibliometric data. The goal of this phase is to identify and extract articles representative of the research field investigated in the analysis. The objective of the data refinement phase is to improve the quality of data (set of articles and their bibliometric data) by standard data-cleansing procedures such as removal of duplications and data clustering (e.g., keywords with British or American spelling) (Cobo, López-Herrera, Herrera-Viedma, & Herrera, 2012). The remaining four phases require specialized software (e.g., SciMat) and their performance is automated based on the selected algorithms and set of conditions about minimum keyword occurrence, minimum keywords co-occurrence, and the size of the thematic network (Cobo, López-Herrera, Herrera-Viedma, & Herrera, 2011). SciMat based on keywords co-occurrence is a relatively novel research method, however it stems from well-established body of knowledge on bibliometric analysis. Moreover, this method already has been applied to a number of social science research such as smart services (Malik, Visvizi, Troisi, & Grimaldi, 2022), the “gig economy” (Malik, Visvizi, & Skrzek-Lubasińska, 2021), the future of work (Santana & Cobo, 2020), big data (López-Robles, Rodríguez-Salvador, GamboaRosales, Ramirez-Rosales, & Cobo, 2019), and creativity in business economics (Castillo-Vergara, Alvarez-Marin, & Placencio-Hidalgo, 2018). The application

HEIs in Times of Covid-19    17 of SciMat based on keywords co-occurrence is not deprived of limitations, which can fall into three categories: those related to the method itself, the data quality, and the scope of the analysis. The first of these limitations is that SciMat relies on an assumption that the keywords provided in the articles by their authors represent the actual content of the research article. The impact of this assumption on the outcome of the analysis can be controlled only to a very limited degree; however, the application of other research methods may improve the insight into the examined research field. In this chapter, the results of SciMat are supplemented by the subsequent literature review as a secondary research method to address this constraint. Second, the quality of input data influences the results of the SciMat, and data used in this analysis are secondary data extracted from external sources. To address this limitation, the choice of reputable databases such as WoS was made and the scope of texts included in the research limited to reviewed journal articles. Third, although SciMat with the use of keywords co-occurrence allows for the application of various tools that provide a diversified outcome, the use of all of them in one research project largely exceeds the length of this chapter. In this research, the choice was made to narrow the analysis to the strategic diagram and thematic networks of motor themes. Nevertheless, subsequent analysis should extend the scope to the tools applied to HEIs during the Covid-19 pandemic. In this research, the sampling was performed from a WoS database, selected as a source of research articles in the first steps of the analysis due to its large coverage and data quality. The goal was to identify the crucial themes related to HEIs during the pandemic in the early stages of the development of this research field. Therefore, the data search based on a query (“higher education institutions” AND “covid”) in the title, abstract, and keywords was performed on November 24, 2021 of the WoS database to identify relevant research articles. The query returned 561 articles with 2,268 various keywords. All phases of the SciMat were performed with the use of SciMat software. In the SciMat, an equivalence index was used as a normalization measure, with the simple center algorithm applied for clustering, as advised for a standard application of SciMat. A minimum frequency of keyword occurrence included in the analysis was 3 and minimum co-occurrence was set to 2, and the applied size of the thematic network was between 4 and 10 keywords in order to ensure an adequate balance between the granularity of the results and agglomeration. Moreover, the words that were used to determine the pool of papers (“HEIs” AND “covid”) were excluded from the analysis in order avoid bias. The application of SciMat based on keywords co-occurrence resulted in the identification of 13 themes with a significant research contribution to the research field of HEIs during the Covid-19 pandemic and are presented in Section 3.

3. HEIs During the Covid-19 Pandemic: Results of the SciMat Analysis In this section, the analysis is focused on the results of the strategic diagram analysis and thematic networks of motor themes to identify crucial themes related to

18    Radosław Malik and Michał Siczek HEIs during the pandemic in early stages of this research field. With the setup presented in Section 2, the queries resulted in the identification of 13 themes with a significant research contribution to HEIs and Covid-19. The themes’ distribution in the strategic diagram with figures as indicators of the number of documents is provided in Fig. 3. The results of the strategic diagram analysis have shown three motor themes (“user-acceptance,” “perceptions,” “satisfaction”) and four basic themes (“engagement,” “model,” “education,” “students”). Two emerging themes were identified (“technology,” “lockdown”), as well as four specialized themes (“medical-students,” “pandemic,” “SARS,” “anxiety”). Overall, the results prove that there is a large variety of topics discussed in the research field related to HEIs and Covid-19, which matches the broad array of challenges that were faced by HEIs during the pandemic. The results indicated that there were three groups of themes that attracted a disproportionate amount of attention from researchers of HEIs during the

Fig. 3.  Strategic Diagram of Themes of HEIs During Covid-19 (Number of Documents). Source: Own research.

HEIs in Times of Covid-19    19 Covid-19 pandemic. The focal point of the research was related to themes about the behavioral, educational, and epidemiological dimensions of HEIs during the pandemic. The research about the behavioral aspects appears dominant and encompasses all motor themes (“user-acceptance,” “perception,” “satisfaction”), one basic theme (“engagement”) and one specialized theme (“anxiety”). The concentration of research about the behavior dimensions of HEIs during the pandemic highlights the multifaceted and elaborate research perspectives that divert from more obvious research avenues related to, e.g., education, epidemiology, and technology. The following significant groups of themes that attracted the attention of the research community include the educational dimension, represented by two basic themes (“education,” “students”) and one specialized theme (“medical students”), as well as the epidemiological research dimension, denoted by two specialized themes (“pandemic,” “SARS”) and one emerging theme (“lockdown”). The gravity of these research themes in relation to HEIs seems intuitive and the emphasis of research undertakings in these areas seems in line with expectations. The two remaining themes in the strategic diagram, one basis theme (“model”) and one specialized theme (“technology”), cannot be easily attributed to any of the three mentioned groups, however they also provide valuable insight into the analyzed research field. The relative underrepresentation of technology-related themes in the area of HEIs during the pandemic may be viewed as an unanticipated outcome, especially give the backdrop of the rapid changes in the use of ICT enforced by lockdowns. The presence of “model” as a basic theme may indicate researchers’ efforts to structure the analyzed phenomenon. The results of the thematic network analysis of the three motor themes (“useracceptance,” “satisfaction,” “perception”) provide more fine-grained insight into the research on HEIs during the Covid-19 pandemic. The thematic network of the “user-acceptance” motor theme consists of 10 highly connected keywords, which justifies the high density of the theme, as shown in Fig. 4. Although “user-acceptance” may seem to establish the behavior of the user in the center of the discussion, the “user-acceptance” thematic network exhibits a significant number of technology-related keywords (“information-technology,” “video conferencing,” “technology-acceptance-model,” “task-technology-fit”). This technology-oriented insight is accompanied by behavioral aspects of “useracceptance” (“adoption,” “perceived usefulness”) and the research on developing countries. The thematic network of “satisfaction” as a motor theme of research into HEIs during the pandemic is characterized by slightly lower density of “useracceptance,” as shown by the less dense network of connections between keywords that form its thematic network, as shown in Fig. 5. The studies about satisfaction in the research field of HEIs during the Covid19 pandemic frequently linked the theme’s educational aspects, such as “onlinelearning” and “curriculum,” and behavioral aspects, such as “personality,” “self-efficacy,” and “participation.” The results show that attempts were made

20    Radosław Malik and Michał Siczek

Fig. 4.  Thematic Network (“User-Acceptance”) in Research on HEIs During the Covid-19 Pandemic. Source: Own research. to explore the chain of cause and results linking satisfaction with keywords such as “determinants,” “outcomes,” and “achievement.” The results of the thematic network of the third motor theme, “perception,” are shown in Fig. 6. The thematic network indicates that the studies about “perception” in the research field of HEIs during the Covid-19 pandemic frequently examined also other behavioral aspects denoted by “behavioural-intention,” “expectations,” “student-satisfaction,” and “loyalty.” Moreover, the results show that the educational dimension was also covered by research related to “perception,” as demonstrated by “faculty” and “service-quality.” The studies about perception include the technology component, as indicated by “education-technology” and “information-and-communication-technologies.”

4. Discussion In the discussion section of the study, a literature review was performed on the three most influential themes (motor themes) provided as the result of the strategic diagram analysis of research of HEIs during the Covid-19 pandemic.

HEIs in Times of Covid-19    21

Fig. 5.  Thematic Network (Satisfaction) in Research into HEIs During the Covid-19 Pandemic. Source: Own research. The discussion covers texts that contributed to the thematic networks of “user-acceptance,” “satisfaction,” and “perception,” as these themes have been identified in Section 3 as motor themes in the strategic diagram of the SciMat. Therefore, these themes constitute the most productive research lines in the literature on HEIs during the Covid-19 pandemic, and discussion of the contents of the articles in these themes contributes to answering the second research question formulated in the chapter’s introduction. The research on user acceptance in HEIs during the Covid-19 pandemic investigates the capacity of the institutions and their stakeholders to accommodate rapid changes in their external environment related to lockdowns and the subsequent emergency proliferation of online learning (Lee & Jung, 2021) while facing a number of skills and technology-related challenges (Akram, Aslam, Saleem, Parveen, 2021). This research stream attempts to reconcile the well-developed body of knowledge about the technology accepted model (TAM) with the dynamics of Covid-19 emergency measures affecting HEIs (Rughoobur-Seetah & Hosanoo, 2021). The studies on the user-acceptance model during the Covid-19 pandemic showed, among others, that the performance expectancy, facilitating conditions,

22    Radosław Malik and Michał Siczek

Fig. 6.  Thematic Network (Perception) in Research into HEIs During the Covid-19 Pandemic. Source: Own research. trust, and autonomy were significant predictors of online-learning acceptance in both public and private universities (Alkhwaldi & Abdulmuhsin, 2021). The results of the literature review indicate that user acceptance in HEIs during the pandemic is discussed in two major perspectives. In the first line of research, numerous papers showed that user acceptance was positively influenced by the perceived usefulness of online learning in general (Ramasamy, Shahzad, & Hassan, 2021; Rughoobur-Seetah & Hosanoo, 2021) and its specific components or tools such as video conferencing (Lee & Jung, 2021) and virtual learning management systems that facilitate remote learning (Navarro, Prasetyo, Young, Nadlifatin, & Redi, 2021). Furthermore, in the second prominent research avenue, the studies revealed a significant and positive influence on user acceptance is exerted by the ease of using online learning (Ramasamy et al., 2021) and its supporting tools (Lee & Jung, 2021; Navarro et al., 2021). However, students and lecturers differ in their perceptions of learning management systems that affect their acceptance of tools supporting online learning and in the persistence of these effects (Kaewsaiha & Chanchalor, 2021). For instance, it has been indicated that the willingness of HEI students to persist in using

HEIs in Times of Covid-19    23 online learning depends on a number of conditions, among others, user-friendly navigation through the online-learning platform, the positive attitude of teachers (Mo, Hsieh, Lin, Jin, & Su, 2021), and the high level of social trust (Alshurafat, Al Shbail, Masadeh, Dahmash, & Al-Msiedeen, 2021). On the other hand, the willingness of teachers to persevere in the same circumstances were linked to family support, choice of platform, and fit between the course design and platform navigation (Mo et al., 2021). Moreover, the role of lecturers has been indicated as crucial in supporting students’ acceptance of online learning by, among others, maintaining ongoing engagement with students and providing them with appropriate facilitating conditions (Camilleri & Camilleri, 2021). The results of the analysis of articles about HEIs during the Covid-19 pandemic revealed that satisfaction is the subject of frequent and large studies. The results of a study conducted on more than 30,000 students from 62 countries shows that during a worldwide lockdown that online learning students were satisfied with the support received from teaching staff and universities. Furthermore, it turned out that students were more satisfied with the role performed by universities compared to governments and financial institutions. Moreover, it found that students with certain characteristics, such as male, part-time, first-level, in the applied sciences, and of Asian and African origin, turned out to be less satisfied with their academic life during the Covid-19 lockdowns (Aristovnik, Keržič, Ravšelj, Tomaževič, & Umek, 2020). A study conducted on college students in China revealed that during lockdown, students felt that the materials and the content of the activities were useful and reported satisfaction in learning. Consequently, students with a high level of satisfaction reported high continuance intention (Wang, Lin, & Su, 2021). Moreover, the perceived value of online lectures during the pandemic have had a positive and significant effect on student satisfaction. Results also showed, that if the perceived value of online lectures is improved, student’s satisfaction will increase along the way (Gusti Ayu Ketut Giantari, Nyoman Kerti Yasa, Gde Raka Suk, & Setini, 2021). Satisfaction from online learning turned out to be an important issue in a study conducted on a group students in Czechia (Dvořáková, Emmer, Janktová, & Klementová, 2021). This study revealed that, on a scale from 1 to 5, students evaluated their satisfaction as 4.07 (on average) due to the quality of communication, regularity, and adequate number of assignments. On the other hand, the lack of these factors resulted in dissatisfaction and additional stress among students (Dvořáková et al., 2021). In a study carried out in China, five factors – system quality, course design, learner–learner interaction, learner–content interaction, and self-discipline – had a positive effect on satisfaction from online learning during the pandemic. On the other hand, learner–instructor interaction had no significant effect on satisfaction. The most relevant determinant that affected student’s satisfaction was learner–content interaction (Su & Guo, 2021). It has been shown that teacher’s and students’ satisfaction from online learning are affected by different factors. Students’ satisfaction mainly depends on the perceived benefits of online courses. On the other hand, students’ satisfaction from online learning is dependent on their perceived effectiveness of online-learning

24    Radosław Malik and Michał Siczek technology, perceived benefits of online courses, and their evaluation of teachers’ performance. Furthermore, the effect of the perceived benefits of an online course on satisfaction is significantly stronger for the teacher group (Ieng Lei & Siu Ian So, 2021). Teachers appeared to be a frequently researched group in the studies about perception in the research field of HEIs and the Covid-19 pandemic. An online qualitative survey that was conducted on university teachers indicted that a perception of ICT skills cannot be linked to working experience before or after Covid-19. Furthermore, teachers experienced a change in their perception of the necessity of ICTs as a teaching tool, which they considered more vital during the pandemic (Espinosa-Navarro et al., 2021). The perception of educators was also the main topic of research conducted on university teachers from India. It turned out that in the teachers’ perceptions, the current state of student engagement in online learning tends to be high (Kumar & Verma, 2021). Students’ perceptions comprised the subject of a significant number of studies. A positive perception of online learning thanks to the blended-learning model was indicated and students pointed out that online learning turned out to be innovative and entertaining (Díaz, Antequera, & Pizarro, 2021). In light of further research, it turned out that the perceived value of online learning has a significant effect on satisfaction. The study showed that the higher the perceived value of the online-learning process, the higher the student’s satisfaction in taking part in online activities, such as lectures (Gusti Ayu Ketut Giantari et al., 2021). The perceived quality of online learning was another topic that received significant attention from researchers. The research conducted on students in Indonesia focused on the perceived quality of satisfaction during online learning during the pandemic. It turned out that the perception of the quality of campus facilities, the learning process, and teaching staff, i.e., characteristics that are different between a traditional classroom and online learning, have a direct and significant effect on students’ satisfaction (Istijanto, 2021). Another study also examined student’s perceptions of the quality of an online university. It was established that the perceived service quality of HEIs and online learning is a key factor that influences students’ willingness to learn. Furthermore, the perceived satisfaction turned out to be a significant factor when it comes to the willingness to recommend a given HEI (Schijns, 2021). In sum, both students’ and lecturers’ perspectives have been broadly discussed in the literature. The emerging research consensus from the examined studies indicates that from the teachers’ perspective that student engagement in online learning is high. On the other hand, the results from the students’ perspective show that quality of learning is the most important issue in their studies during the pandemic. It was revealed that both groups perceived the quality of online learning as a crucial factor influencing the learning process.

5. Conclusions The objective of this chapter was to review and map the research field of HEIs during the Covid-19 pandemic as an early (emerging) research area to provide

HEIs in Times of Covid-19    25 timely insight into the rapidly growing body of knowledge developed in the response to the shifts in HEIs. The text addressed the two research questions formulated in the Introduction. In this study, SciMat based on keywords co-occurrence was applied to distinguish the significant themes of the research into HEIs during the pandemic and provide a response to the first research question. The literature review of the articles from the three most significant (motor) themes was subsequently reviewed to synthesize the content of the key research and provide an answer to the second research question. The results of the SciMat indicated 13 themes with a significant contribution to the research into HEIs during the pandemic, with the top 3 themes identified as user acceptance, satisfaction, and perception. The 13 significant themes can be organized around 3 leading research dimensions – behavioral, educational, and epidemiological aspects – of HEIs during the Covid-19 pandemic. The technological dimension of the research appeared relatively under-researched as a standalone theme. However, a more fine-grained analysis of the thematic networks demonstrated significant technology-orientated components in the research on user acceptance, satisfaction, and perception. The literature review of the top themes showed an emerging consensus about user acceptance influenced by the perceived usefulness of online learning and ease of using supporting tools. Moreover, it was shown that conditions influencing user acceptance for students and lecturers differ. The review of studies on satisfaction in the context of HEIs during the pandemic indicated a relatively high level of satisfaction among students with online learning, which is largely linked to the perceived benefits of online courses. The studies on perception of online learning seem to generally support, perhaps counter-intuitively, the notion that lecturers perceived student engagement as high in the online learning mode. The contribution of this research is threefold. First, the study is the first bibliometric analysis of HEIs during the Covid-19 pandemic, which provides timely insight into this emerging and crucial research field through the use of novel SciMat based on keywords co-occurrence. Second, the study identifies the top themes (user acceptance, perception, satisfaction) that thus far have attracted the most attention of the research community and analyzed their thematic structure, indicting under-researched areas. Third, the study provided a literature review of the top themes and presents a synthesis of the research directions.

References Abu Talib, M., Bettayeb, A. M., & Omer, R. I. (2021). Analytical study on the impact of technology in higher education during the age of COVID-19: Systematic literature review. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 6719–6746. doi: 10.1007/ S10639-021-10507-1/TABLES/7 Alkhwaldi, A. F., & Abdulmuhsin, A. A. (2021). Crisis-centric distance learning model in Jordanian higher education sector: Factors influencing the continuous use of distance learning platforms during COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of International Education in Business. doi: 10.1108/JIEB-01-2021-0001

26    Radosław Malik and Michał Siczek Akram, H., Aslam, S., Saleem, A., Parveen, K. (2021). The challenges of online teaching In covid-19 pandemic: A case study of public universities in Karachi, Pakistan. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 20, 263–282. doi: 10.28945/4784 Alshurafat, H., Al Shbail, M. O., Masadeh, W. M., Dahmash, F., & Al-Msiedeen, J. M. (2021). Factors affecting online accounting education during the COVID-19 pandemic: An integrated perspective of social capital theory, the theory of reasoned action and the technology acceptance model. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 6995–7013. doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10550-y Aristovnik, A., Keržič, D., Ravšelj, D., Tomaževič, N., & Umek, L. (2020). Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on life of higher education students: A global perspective. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(20), 1–34. doi: 10.3390/su12208438 Bento, F., Giglio Bottino, A., Cerchiareto Pereira, F., Forastieri de Almeida, J., Gomes Rodrigues, F., Pereira, C., … Reichgelt, H. (2021). Resilience in higher education: A complex perspective to lecturers’ adaptive processes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Education Sciences, 11(9), 492. doi: 10.3390/EDUCSCI11090492 Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., & Laville, F. (1991). Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemsitry. Scientometrics, 22(1), 155–205. Camilleri, M. A. (2021). Evaluating service quality and performance of higher education institutions: A systematic review and a post-COVID-19 outlook. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 13(2), 268–281. https://doi.org/10.1108/ IJQSS-03-2020-0034/FULL/PDF Camilleri, M. A., & Camilleri, A. C. (2021). The acceptance of learning management systems and video conferencing technologies: Lessons learned from COVID-19. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 0123456789. doi: 10.1007/s10758-021-09561-y Castillo-Vergara, M., Alvarez-Marin, A., & Placencio-Hidalgo, D. (2018). A bibliometric analysis of creativity in the field of business economics. Journal of Business Research, 85, 1–9. Chen, C. (2017). Science mapping: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2(2), 1–40. Cicha, K., Rizun, M., Rutecka, P., & Strzelecki, A. (2021). COVID-19 and higher education: First-year students’ expectations toward distance learning. Sustainability, 13(4), 1889. doi: 10.3390/SU13041889 Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology, 62(7), 1382–1402. Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2012). SciMAT: A new science mapping analysis software tool. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(8), 1609–1630. Daniela, L., & Visvizi, A. (2021). Introduction: Remote learning as a mode of distance learning. In L. Daniela & A. Visvizi (Eds.), Remote learning in times of pandemic issues, implications and best practice. London: Routledge. Díaz, M. J. S., Antequera, J. G., & Pizarro, M. C. (2021). Flipped classroom in the context of higher education: Learning, satisfaction and interaction. Education Sciences, 11(8). doi: 10.3390/educsci11080416 Dvořáková, K., Emmer, J., Janktová, R., & Klementová, K. (2021). From f2f to ert: University students’ perception of remote learning during the first covid-19 lockdown. Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, 14(2), 89–100. doi: 10.7160/eriesj.2021.140203 Espinosa-Navarro, J. A., Vaquero-Abellán, M., Perea-Moreno, A. J., Pedrós-Pérez, G., Aparicio-Martínez, P., & Martínez-Jiménez, P. (2021). The higher education

HEIs in Times of Covid-19    27 sustainability before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A spanish and ecuadorian case. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(11). doi: 10.3390/su13116363 Gusti Ayu Ketut Giantari, I., Nyoman Kerti Yasa, N., Gde Raka Suk, T., & Setini, M. (2021). Student satisfaction and perceived value on word of mouth (WOM) during the COVID-19 pandemic: An empirical study in Indonesia. Journal of Asian Finance, 8(6), 1047–1056. doi: 10.13106/jafeb.2021.vol8.no6.1047 Gutiérrez-Salcedo, M., Martínez, M. Á., Moral-Muñoz, J. A., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Cobo, M. J. (2018). Some bibliometric procedures for analyzing and evaluating research fields. Applied Intelligence, 48(5), 1275–1287. Ieng Lei, S., & Siu Ian So, A. (2021). Online teaching and learning experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic: A comparison of teacher and student perceptions. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 33(3), 148–162. doi: 10.1080/ 10963758.2021.1907196 Istijanto. (2021). The effects of perceived quality differences between the traditional classroom and online distance learning on student satisfaction: Evidence from COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia. Quality Assurance in Education, 29(4), 477–490. doi: 10.1108/QAE-08-2020-0098 Johnson, A. F., Roberto, K. J., & Rauhaus, B. M. (2021). Policies, politics and pandemics: Course delivery method for US higher educational institutions amid COVID-19. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 15(2), 291–303. doi: 10.1108/ TG-07-2020-0158 Jung, J., Horta, H., & Postiglione, G. A. (2021). Living in uncertainty: The COVID-19 pandemic and higher education in Hong Kong. Studies in Higher Education, 46(1), 107–120. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2020.1859685 Kaewsaiha, P., & Chanchalor, S. (2021). Factors affecting the usage of learning management systems in higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 26(3), 2919–2939. doi: 10.1007/s10639-020-10374-2 Kumar, V., & Verma, A. (2021). An exploratory assessment of the educational practices during COVID-19. Quality Assurance in Education, 29(4), 373–392. doi: 10.1108/ QAE-12-2020-0170 Lee, J., & Jung, I. (2021). Instructional changes instigated by university faculty during the COVID-19 pandemic: The effect of individual, course and institutional factors. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1). doi: 10.1186/s41239-021-00286-7 López-Robles, J. R., Rodríguez-Salvador, M., Gamboa-Rosales, N. K., Ramirez-Rosales, S., & Cobo, M. J. (2019). The last five years of Big Data Research in economics, econometrics and finance: Identification and conceptual analysis. Procedia Computer Science, 162, 729–736. Mahmood, S. (2021). Instructional strategies for online teaching in COVID-19 pandemic. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 3(1), 199–203. doi: 10.1002/HBE2.218 Malik, R., Visvizi, A., & Skrzek-Lubasińska, M. (2021). The Gig Economy: Current issues, the debate, and the new avenues of research. Sustainability, 13(9), 5023. Malik, R., Visvizi, A., Troisi, O., & Grimaldi, M. (2022). Smart services in smart cities: Insights from science mapping analysis. Sustainability, 14, 6506. doi: 10.3390/ su14116506 Mo, C. Y., Hsieh, T. H., Lin, C. L., Jin, Y. Q., & Su, Y. S. (2021). Exploring the critical factors, the online learning continuance usage during covid-19 pandemic. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(10), 1–14. doi: 10.3390/su13105471 Navarro, M. M., Prasetyo, Y. T., Young, M. N., Nadlifatin, R., & Redi, A. A. N. P. (2021). The perceived satisfaction in utilizing learning management systems among engineering students during the COVID-19 pandemic: Integrating task technology fit

28    Radosław Malik and Michał Siczek and extended technology acceptance model. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(19). doi: 10.3390/su131910669 Neuwirth, L. S., Jović, S., & Mukherji, B. R. (2020). Reimagining higher education during and post-COVID-19: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Adult and Continuing Education, 27(2), 141–156. doi: 10.1177/1477971420947738 Ramasamy, S. P., Shahzad, A., & Hassan, R. (2021). COVID-19 pandemic impact on students intention to use e-learning among malaysian higher education institutions. Journal of Education. doi: 10.1177/00220574211032599 Rughoobur-Seetah, S., & Hosanoo, Z. A. (2021). An evaluation of the impact of confinement on the quality of e-learning in higher education institutions. Quality Assurance in Education, 29(4), 422–444. doi: 10.1108/QAE-03-2021-0043 Sá, M. J., & Serpa, S. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic as an opportunity to foster the sustainable development of teaching in higher education. Sustainability, 12(20), 8525. doi: 10.3390/SU12208525 Santana, M., & Cobo, M. J. (2020). What is the future of work? A science mapping analysis. European Management Journal, 38(6), 846–862. Schijns, J. M. C. (2021). Measuring service quality at an online university: Using PLS-SEM with archival data. Tertiary Education and Management, 27(2), 161–185. doi: 10.1007/s11233-021-09071-7 Shahzad, A., Hassan, R., Aremu, A. Y., Hussain, A., & Lodhi, R. N. (2021). Effects of COVID-19 in E-learning on higher education institution students: The group comparison between male and female. Quality and Quantity, 55(3), 805–826. doi: 10.1007/S11135-020-01028-Z/TABLES/7 Su, C., & Guo, Y. (2021). Factors impacting university students’ online learning experiences during the COVID-19 epidemic. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12555 Su, H. N., & Lee, P. C. (2010). Mapping knowledge structure by keyword co-occurrence: A first look at journal papers in Technology Foresight. Scientometrics, 85(1), 65–79. Visvizi, A., Daniela, L., & Chen, Ch. W. (2020). Beyond the ICT- and sustainability hypes: A case for quality education. Computers in Human Behavior, 107, 1–3. doi: 10.1016/j. chb.2020.106304 Visvizi, A., Lytras, M. D., & Sarirete, A. (2019). By means of conclusion: ICT at the service of higher education in a transforming world. In A. Visvizi, M. D. Lytras, &, A. Sarirete (Eds.), Management and administration of higher education institutions in times of change. Bingley: Emerald Publishing. ISBN: 9781789736281. Wang, T., Lin, C. L., & Su, Y. S. (2021). Continuance intention of university students and online learning during the covid-19 pandemic: A modified expectation confirmation model perspective. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(8). doi: 10.3390/su13084586

Chapter 3

Online Teaching in HEIs vs. Online International Negotiation: Analogies and Transferable Good Practices Christian Pauletto Abstract The concept of innovation should not be reduced to its technological dimension but encompasses the whole context of its deployment and implementation. Regardless of technology, an innovation may be successful or not depending on how well its implementation suits each single context. In the case of education, this consists, to a sizeable extent, in a communicational and interpersonal context. The hypothesis of this piece is that maintaining optimal communication between participants is a key factor of success of new online teaching methods. Given that in this regard, there are similarities between negotiating practice and teaching practice, it is worth examining whether good practices developed in online international negotiation are transferable to online teaching. The chapter identifies a number of practices from online negotiation that perform well in online teaching. It focuses on communicational aspects, mutual understanding (monitoring and optimization of understanding), motivation to listen, attention, active participation, and non-verbal communication. Online teaching and online negotiation share another common feature: some unresolved challenges are common to both disciplines. This should also be taken into account when migrating educational programmes online. The research is informed by the author’s first-hand experience from practice in both international diplomatic negotiation and academic teaching. Keywords: Online teaching; higher education; academic teaching; international negotiation; diplomacy; digital diplomacy

Moving Higher Education Beyond Covid-19: Innovative and Technology-Enhanced Approaches to Teaching and Learning, 29–51 Copyright © 2023 by Christian Pauletto Published under exclusive licence by Emerald Publishing Limited doi:10.1108/978-1-80382-517-520231003

30    Christian Pauletto Good teaching is good teaching, regardless of technology. Michelle Miller (2014)

1. Introduction The Covid-19 pandemic and the ensuing increased adoption of remote education, in particular online education, has made the challenge of online teaching quite manifest. In particular, the adoption of online teaching was challenged by the combination of a “digital divide” and an “educational divide” (education poverty/learning poverty) (Pauletto, 2023). These two types of the divide persist between geographies as well as between strata of the society. This is a matter of concern, and it makes it all the more important to enquire how online education, if it is there to stay, might be made more effective. Accordingly, the aim of this chapter is to explore whether experiences from online international negotiation are transferable into online teaching in higher education institutions (HEIs). In so doing, this chapter addresses the challenges of the migration of ex cathedra lectures onto online and hybrid modules during the Covid-19 pandemic. A direction in academic literature and research on online education often explores transferable good practices (Visvizi, Lytras, & Daniela, 2019). One example is the literature on digital learning games and gamification and how game-like addictive or compulsive features could be transferred to improve online students’ attention and motivation (Abdul Razak, Izani, Abidin, & Connolly, 2019). According to Plass, Homer, and Kinzer (2015), “[d]efinitions of gamebased learning mostly emphasize that it is a type of game play with defined learning outcomes,” while [w]hat exactly is meant by gamification varies widely, but one of its defining qualities is that it involves the use of game elements, such as incentive systems, to motivate players to engage in a task they otherwise would not find attractive. Miller’s (2014, pp. 24–25, 188–194) suggestion to education scholars is that “[f] or another perspective on principles of good teaching, consider the techniques used by computer-game designers, who, after all, make their living creating irresistibly motivating virtual experiences.” She notes in particular that [t]asks and activities are challenging, but – crucially – there is protection from initial failure, so that you get lots of chances to meet those challenges. You operate in an atmosphere of social interactivity, which offers you solidarity with others and affirmation of your successes. Randi and Corno (2021) observed that students can experience flow states in entertainment-based gaming environments and suggest that

Online Teaching in HEIs vs. Online International Negotiation    31 game-like learning environments may keep students motivated, […]. Thus, it seems important for faculty to understand what motivational principles are inherent in these games and how these [principles] might be incorporated into online courses. Hartt, Hosseini, and Mostafapour (2020) concur in that “[g]ames enable the integration of both intrinsic and extrinsic motivational components to cultivate an environment where players feel more motivated to engage in the target activities.” Another example relates to the lessons drawn from the social network and media industry and how they could be transferable to online education (Visvizi, Jussila, Lytras, & Ijäs, 2020). In their study on online social networks, Hamid, Waycott, Kurnia, and Chang (2015) found that “[s]tudents appeared to enjoy OSN use, resulting in the creation of a more interactive and appealing learning environment – hence, increasing their learning motivation.” Hung and Chi-Yin Yuen (2010) “urge higher education practitioners to look more closely at the technological affordance of social media and its instructional use for creating a positive learning community.” Further references and comments about computer games and social networks for teaching purposes are provided by Pauletto (2022). However, irrespective of this wealth of approaches to online teaching, the practice of online diplomatic negotiation and the practice of online teaching in HEIs have not been discussed in conjunction with one another in scholarly literature. In this chapter, a case is made that such a comparative perspective would not only spur cross-fertilization. It would also permit shifting the spotlight to specific aspects of teaching, namely the communicational and interpersonal dimensions. International diplomatic negotiation is also an interesting case because it is a field where some degree of online engagement was adopted very early. First negotiators took advantage of this opportunity shortly after appropriate teleconferencing technologies became commercially available on the market. The argument in this chapter is structured as follows. First, the aims and scope of the research are clarified (Section 2); then, the relevance of online diplomatic negotiation for online teaching in HEIs is elaborated (Section 3); then the impacts of a migration from a physical environment to a virtual environment are assessed (Section 4) and communication and its variability is explored in online and onsite settings (Section 5); on that basis the chapter examines how potential negative impacts are mitigated in diplomatic negotiation practice (Section 6); finally, the transferability of such practice into the teaching practice is assessed (Section 7). Some unresolved challenges are considered (Section 8) before drawing the conclusions (Section 9).

2. Aims, Scope, and Definitions This chapter focusses on the communicational and interpersonal dimensions of online education. This is because in an innovation or transformation process, adoption of a new technology and adaptation of the communicational technique

32    Christian Pauletto go hand in hand (Visvizi, Daniela, & Chen, 2020). It is not enough that new tools and new technology be properly implemented technically speaking. Instead, during the technology-driven transformative process, a profound pedagogical reflection should be undertaken, and the pedagogical engineering should be adapted. It is assumed that it would not be optimal for the educator to adopt a new technology while continuing to deliver the teaching in the same way. While it is important that educators master all technical functionalities of new ICT-enabled tools, they should also rethink their pedagogical and communication method and approach. Therefore, this chapter very deliberately relies on the broadest possible definition of innovation: a holistic definition that encompasses digital teaching tools and the communicational and interpersonal adaptation that must go with them. This chapter attempts to illustrate this multidirectional notion of innovation. Concretely, this chapter shows that academic instructors need to innovate also in terms of their communication and relationship with students, in order to adapt it to technological innovation. Failure to do so bears the risk of delivering suboptimal outcomes. There is an additional reason why interpersonal communication deserves some focus in the context of digital innovation in higher education. This is because with or without innovation, and whether online or face-to-face, communication and social relationship in general are often considered in the literature as important factors of success of education, and indeed often also as a challenge. For example, Naylor and Nyanjom (2021) start their article by affirming that [t]eaching by its very nature is a complex social, personal and cognitive process that relies on effective communication and relationships between educators and students, and as such it is an emotional experience for both. Kohnke and Moorhouse (2021) identified “communication challenges” as one of the five themes emerging from their data analysis. Baran, Correia, and Thompson (2011) identified “communication competencies” as one of three teacher competencies that “can be considered more important than others depending on the context and culture within the online teaching environments.” Rice and Deschaine (2020) note that, in the context of the adoption of online teaching tools, “new models must also consider social and affective elements that affect relationships in online learning.” One of the five components of teachers’ roles identified by Badia, García, and Meneses (2019) was the “social interaction role,” defined as “promoting relationships of trust and mutual commitment among students, and between students and the teacher, resolving group conflicts and enhancing mutual communication among participants.” Denis, Watland, Pirotte, and Verday (2004) showed that the e-tutor has a large range of roles (e.g. social, technical, didactical, discipline expert, etc.) each with the need to develop different types of competencies such as pedagogical, technical, communicational, interpersonal skills.

Online Teaching in HEIs vs. Online International Negotiation    33 In a study investigating the impact of instructors’ basic online competence on marketing students’ impressions of online instruction, Kordrostami and Seitz (2021) found that “when instructors offer clear communication, provide focused students’ discussions, and provide timely, customized feedback, as expected there was a direct and robust effect on students’ overall impression of the course.” In their students’ survey, Adnan and Anwar (2020) found that “[w]hile reporting about the effectiveness of face-to-face interaction, 78.6% of students feel that face-to-face contact with an instructor is necessary for learning and distance learning.” However, literature does not always retain communication skills and relationship as a specific priority. For instance, Babatunde Adedoyin and Soykan (2020) do not include communication in their list of four “challenges.” Other researchers found that “some evidence points to a point of diminishing returns for interpersonal interaction” (Mehall, 2021). The striking fact is that almost all of the above findings in respect of teaching and teachers could also apply to diplomatic negotiation and negotiators. This is because communication and interpersonal skills represent a common ground between two practices, that of teaching and that of diplomatic negotiation. In the past two decades, diplomacy too has undergone a digitally-driven innovation process, and realized that one main challenge in this was to adapt interpersonal and communicational codes. Thus, it may be assumed that experiences made and good practices developed in one field of practice could be transferable to the other field of practice. This is exactly what this research is about. This chapter’s research questions are: ⦁⦁ what are the similarities between the negotiating practice and the academic

teaching practice?

⦁⦁ what challenges do diplomatic negotiators face in terms of efficient communi-

cation when migrating from a physical context to a virtual context?

⦁⦁ what good practices were developed in the field of online international negotia-

tion (mainly treaty negotiation)?

⦁⦁ are those good practices relevant and transferable to higher education? ⦁⦁ are there some unresolved challenges?

As alluded to, the research questions focus primarily on interpersonal and communication aspects, i.e., mutual understanding (monitoring and optimization of understanding), motivation to listen, attention, active participation, non-verbal or paralinguistic communication. Commercial conferencing platforms routinely provide functionalities such as chat areas, discussions threads, or a variety of voting configurations. They may effectively support and ease communication among participants to online negotiations or classes, as shown passim in this book. Relying on clear definitions is a prerequisite for ensuring an appropriate scope of research. The question of definitions is not an obvious one though, probably because the technology is still evolving and the teaching models and methods still adapting. It’s uneasy to define what basically amounts to a moving target. There is no international authoritative definition of online teaching or education, and the various definitions posited and used may sometimes be quite divergent.

34    Christian Pauletto Very often, notably in the context of some UNESCO bodies, this term refers to teaching to a class at distance using ICT-enabled networks and programmes (UNESCO, 2016; UNESCO-UNEVOC, 2009). This concept is a part of and is narrower than “distance teaching” or “remote teaching” which include nonICT-mediated means (and which has probably existed since ever). There are several sub-types of online teaching methods, and their number in growing. Given that the purpose of this chapter is to explore the transferability of online negotiation methods and good practices, the first aspect of the methodology applied in this chapter is to align the scope of research to a subset of online teaching that is as comparable as possible to the usual methods of online negotiation. Thus, for the purpose of this chapter, “online negotiation” means negotiation between government representatives using video conferencing systems. Such conferencing systems may rely on conventional telecommunication networks and operators or be web-based. Consequently, this chapter will focus on a specific technical type of online teaching, namely teaching based on synchronous video conferencing. Teaching methods such as Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), pre-recorded course modules (such as video lectures), the provision of self-directed learning contents and other asynchronous online processes are not considered in this chapter. Even though synchronous teleconferencing techniques existed since the early 2000s, the literature on online education (and on negotiation too) until recently neglected this method and focused on the aforementioned asynchronous methods. Nowadays, some web-based commercial platforms such as Zoom may be popular for both negotiating purposes (depending on the level of confidentiality required) and educational purposes. In practice, a HEI may provide online education through synchronous videoconferencing from one place (or classroom). However, similar to a negotiation between several parties or capitals, videoconferencing with so-called “distributed locations” is perfectly possible, e.g., if a HEI has several campuses. In technical terms, this is often referred to as “online synchronous distributed teaching.” A corresponding term is not (yet) used in negotiation. We would call that “online synchronous distributed negotiation.” The terms “hybrid” and “blended” have traditionally been used without distinction and this is still the case for most authors (Hunt, 2018), but this is changing (Hass & Joseph, 2018). Initially these terms referred to a teaching where online sessions alternate with onsite sessions, and later also included formats where in the same session some students attend online and others onsite. For the purpose of this chapter, the term “hybrid” will be used to refer to sessions where online and onsite students are mixed, and the term “blended” will refer to an alternation of sessions with different formats, namely online, onsite or hybrid. It is key to differentiate between these nuances because they exist in both the negotiating practice and the teaching practice. In negotiation too, a single session may involve a combination of online and onsite attendees, and a negotiating process may consist of a succession of onsite, synchronous online, and hybrid sessions. The debate about the challenges of online learning has become so confused that there is now a need to clarify the meaning of presence. Etymologically, and

Online Teaching in HEIs vs. Online International Negotiation    35 in accordance with the Oxford dictionary, presence means “being present in a place,” where present means “being in the place in question” (emphases added). The phrase “in presence of somebody” carries the same meaning. This chapter sticks to this definition. Under this definition, phrases such as “virtual presence,” “computer-mediated presence,” or “online presence,” etc. are oxymora. In part of the literature presence is often used as a proxy for availability, feedback, responsiveness, contact, attention or even interaction. In many cases, presence is used in lieu of communication. Thus, whenever something different from an actual (physical) presence is meant, this article will use the phrase “a sense of presence,” as many other authors such as Lehman and Conceição (2010).

3. Similarities Between Negotiating and Teaching A necessary prerequisite for addressing the question of transferability between any two settings is to check whether the settings under consideration share relevant similarities. Accordingly, this section attempts to make an inventory of the similarities between the negotiating practice and the teaching practice. It explores similarities in terms of ecosystem, objectives and communication skills and methods. But before delving into the big picture of ecosystems, one similarity should not be overlooked, namely the motivation for online migration. As a matter of fact, when asked what the positive sides of online teaching are, students tend to emphasize its flexibility in terms of place and time, and its convenience (Hass & Joseph, 2018, p. 234; Hunt, 2018, p. 28; Miller, 2014, pp. 9, 26). No scientific enquiries were undertaken as to the advantages of online settings in the view of diplomats, but it may safely be assumed that they are just the same. It is noteworthy that the absence of human relationship and interaction (verbal and nonverbal, thus including interactions occurring in mainstream lecturing mode) is invariably mentioned as the main downside of online teaching (Hass & Joseph, 2018, p. 232; Hunt, 2018, p. 27; Tichavsky, Hunt, Jicha, & Driscoll, 2015, p. 3), and certainly so for negotiation too. Teaching and negotiating ecosystems consist of several elements. Based on Visvizi et al. (2019, p. 2), this chapter defines such ecosystems as as set out in Table 1. Table 1 shows that whether in-person or online, the respective ecosystems of teaching and negotiation are, in generic terms, relatively similar inasmuch as at least four elements are present in both ecosystems. Of course, the concrete items in each generic category are quite different, but the generic elements per se are similar. Another similarity pertains to the setting of objectives in both negotiation practice and teaching practice. The first point to stress is that in both instances, setting objectives is not only a common practice but is also key for a smooth process and for successful outcomes (key factors of success). The next sections will elaborate on the reasons why this fact needs to be kept in mind when migrating online. Besides, the main contours of the objectives set in a negotiating session or a teaching module may often be similar. Table 2 shows two objectives that are typical of negotiations and two others that are typical in teaching.

36    Christian Pauletto Table 1.  Elements of the Teaching and the Negotiating Ecosystems. Generic Element

Items

Examples in Teaching

Examples in Negotiation

Resources

Documents, material

Textbooks, manuals, handouts, reading lists, exercises

Rules of procedures, agreed negotiating modalities, negotiating proposals, drafts

(ICT-)Tools

Software, hardware, communication platforms

Educational software of the HEI, students’ laptops etc., online teaching platform

Commercial software, teleconferencing room, teleconferencing communication software and network

Partners

Internal and external people

Teacher, students, colleagues, administrative staff, IT support staff

Negotiators, experts, colleagues, administrative staff, IT support staff

Media

Modes of communication

Language, verbal communication, written communication

Language, verbal communication, written communication

Source: The author, based on Visvizi et al. (2019).

As Table 2 shows, the respective objectives can be grouped in two pairs on the basis of their similarity. To meet objectives as similar as these, a priori very similar communication methods could be used. There are, of course, other instances of very similar pairs of objectives such as the above ones. These ones were chosen also for another reason. Often, people see negotiation as an exercise aiming at reaching consensus or agreement and, of course, it is. But first and foremost, it is an exercise aiming at understanding each other. If the parties to a negotiation do not understand each other they would hardly reach a good agreement, or even fail to agree on anything meaningful. The importance of making oneself well understood by an audience is another commonality between negotiation and teaching, which goes beyond the mere conveyance of raw information. They have this in common both in the traditional world of classrooms and negotiating rooms and online. In the latter case, this is perhaps where the main problems start, as will be explored in the next section.

Online Teaching in HEIs vs. Online International Negotiation    37 Table 2.  Negotiating Versus Teaching Objectives. Negotiating Objectives

Teaching Objectives

Objective 1

The counterpart to understand the rationale of the limits imposed to my ability to make concessions

Students to understand the rationale and limitation of behavioral theory in international marketing

Objective 2

The counterpart to understand the value and benefits of my offer

Students to understand how the implementation of this theory can provide value and benefits for enterprises

Source: The author.

4. Migrating from a Physical Room to Online: What are the Impacts? This section examines the impacts of migrating online both in a negotiating environment and in a teaching environment with a particular focus on the behavior of participants, i.e., negotiating teams respectively students. In a nutshell, the impact most often observed or at least perceived in online negotiations is a higher risk of misunderstanding. Online, negotiators seem to have more difficulty understanding each other compared to face-to-face conversation. This would seem quite intuitive. Yet, the exact reasons for this fact might be manifold and may root deeply into the human psyche, and surely would deserve more research. Therefore, when migrating online the adjustments to undertake in the communication methods would aim at minimizing misunderstandings as far as possible. Given that the reasons for misunderstanding are varied, and that the levels where misunderstanding occurs are varied as well, it follows that the adjustments too need to be performed at several levels as shown in the next section. Probably, the manner in which an online session starts is part of the reason why difficulties are more likely to occur. In an in-person event, participants would always have some time in the corridors or immediately before the event to informally exchange few words. Seasoned negotiators would confirm that this exchange would typically pertain to the aim, the expectations, the objectives or the focus of the ensuing session. Online, the process is too formalized to allow informal preliminary chat among key participants. Usually, the online session starts with a lengthy fine-tune of merely technical parameters and − more often than not − the necessity to solve connectivity problems. Then, once all computer settings are in place and ready, the participants will directly take up “Agenda Item 1.” Even when Item 1 consists in an exchange of general remarks, participants who are not used to online sessions would start on a quite formal tone, disregarding the fact that the usual informal preliminary chats could not take place. Unavoidably, something is lost to start with. This may, and often does,

38    Christian Pauletto result in not being quite on the same page during the remainder of the session and a higher likelihood of absence of convergence between the parties. In a classroom, the same phenomenon may occur. The abrupt way of starting interaction between instructor and students when they are online potentially has the same impact. Besides, the absence of proximity, the fact of not seeing each other, are circumstances that often have an impact on the ensuing exchange between the educator and the students. The second challenge is more practical. In a physical session, where human beings sit together in a room, some degree of improvization would go unnoticed and even can be appreciated as a positive aspect. When negotiating face-toface, nobody would be surprised if one or several participants happen to “think loudly” or start wondering how to proceed in the session, what to do, or even ask to take some time for thinking.1 In the classroom as well, the level of “tolerance” for a degree of improvization by the educator is part of the game, or is even a welcome way to make the class more inclusive, relaxed, lively and interesting − in short, more human. Online, both in negotiation and in teaching practice, improvization is extremely difficult to handle properly and more often than not has a negative rather than a positive impact. Saying something “off the cuff ” would, face-to-face, stimulate interaction and engagement − but online it more likely triggers silence, waiting for the speaker to get more specific and affirmative. When an online speaker gives the impression of “not knowing” what to say, or how to proceed, or what to do, whether a negotiator or a teacher, the impact definitely cannot be positive. The attention and motivation of participants might be (negatively) affected. Instead of bringing a “human” touch, it conveys an impression of uncertainty. Consciously or unconsciously, participants become unsure about the process or about their counterpart (teacher or negotiator) and start to have doubts. Again, the reasons for such diverse perception of the same situation are worth specific research. Possibly, the perception of time is relative, and a few seconds online seem much longer than the same few seconds sitting together. And possibly this differentiated perception has something to do with the fact that in a room, the brain and senses of attendees are still busy observing a host of things such as whole-body language or attitude and interpreting them. By contrast, online all the attention is concentrated on the speech, what comes from the loudspeaker, and at best a small-size low-resolution portrait. But whatever the reason(s), this is what is invariably observed in real life: hesitation is manageable in a room but not manageable online. Some basic but typical negotiating situations may help visualizing concretely the difficulty. It is part of the routine of any negotiating session to hear open questions such as: “Is there anyone who wishes to take the floor?,” “Shall we have a short break now?,” “Is a five-minute break enough or do we need more?,” “May I suggest we resume our discussion now?,” Usually those are settled swiftly and 1

On improvization the famous negotiation scholar Saner (1997, p. 181) wrote that “[…] in a negation there are, of course, also intermediary steps, pauses, turns, swings, jumps, in fact anything that comes across the mind of the negotiators. Thus, they often have to improvise […]” (translation from German by the author).

Online Teaching in HEIs vs. Online International Negotiation    39 smoothly, in most cases with a consensual answer given through eye contact or hand signal. Not so when raised online. In particular the very common and wellestablished question “May I suggest we resume our discussion now?” would most likely serve little purpose online. Those few examples illustrate why an online session excludes improvization and requires a much more thorough fine-tuning of the process. This leads to a key aspect of communication: body language and non-verbal communication. This vital issue shall be discussed in more detail in the following section.

5. Communication and its Variability in Online and Onsite Settings In face-to-face settings, a speaker has an array of ways to bring ideas, opinions and messages across. Online, most of them disappear and the speaker is constrained to use verbal communication only. If, in such online setting, the content of this verbal communication is identical (i.e., limited) to what the speaker would actually say in the real (non-virtual) world, then the informative content of the non-verbal communication is missed out by the listeners. If non-verbal communication were the privilege of the sole speaker, the matter would be relatively simple. The problem is that it is not. Consider the following sequence that certainly occurred in a host of real negotiations involving, for example, two negotiating teams. The quoted texts are interventions made by the lead of one negotiating team, followed by the reaction from the other team (or even members of both teams as the case may be): − − − − − − − −

“May I suggest that we …?” non-verbal reaction. “Hmm, I gather that my proposal doesn’t seem very attractive to the floor.” non-verbal reaction. “Then may I instead suggest to …?” non-verbal reaction. “This seems to be agreeable to all participants, let us proceed that way then.” non-verbal reaction.

The previous section has already provided some reasons why improvization is doable and even a plus in face-to-face sessions but becomes problematic online. The above dialogue illustrates one more reason, namely the fact that non-verbal communication plays a key role in improvization, a role that makes it possible to run a smooth and well-controlled debate in spite of “walking in the darkness” for a few minutes. This underscores the more general role of eye contact and observation, to which this section now turns. Consciously or not, the speaker constantly adapts its attitude to what his senses perceive from the room. It suffices to think of how speakers react, even unconsciously, as soon as the level of noise increases in the room. The speaker’s reaction does not need to be an explicit one, and in most cases it even should better not be too explicit to avoid the risk of annoying everyone. For example, one

40    Christian Pauletto of the author’s preferred tricks is very simply to reduce for a while the speed of the speech delivery. This proved very effective in the author’s experience, while not being intrusive or disruptive on the course of the session. Another trick frequently used is for the speaker to speak in a low voice for a few seconds. Of course, turning unconscious perceptions and adaptation into conscious ones always pays off. That is why, since the birth of the rhetoric art in the Antique, a traditional golden rule in negotiation is to keep observing one’s counterparts. So, what if one cannot see them at all? This online difficulty is so obvious that it does not need extensive elaboration. It is equally obvious that observation is also a golden rule in conventional teaching, a rule that is hard to implement in an online context. In addition to constantly observing the general mood and sentiment of the room, expression from the room may and should also be actively triggered. One example is the teacher’s or speaker’s habit to place a question such as “Is that clear to everyone?,” which in spite of being largely rhetorical allows to have feedback at a glance. Such feedback may be a positive or a negative one, but in any case, is non-verbal. Thus far, the focus of the discussion in this chapter was mainly on the speaker’s perspective. However, negotiation and teaching are essentially interactive. Even when the instructor seems to be holding a monologue, he is not really, since there is (or at least should be) a constant non-verbal interaction with the audience. Therefore, the perspective of the audience is equally important. What is often observed in online teaching and negotiation is a lesser involvement of participants. Students would ask fewer questions and generally intervene less in the discussion. Negotiation often involves not just some key players such as the official spokespersons but also a number of participants, such as experts, representatives of interested ministries or authorities, advisers, or lawyers. The latter participants would involve themselves less when the conversation is online compared to in-person sessions, very similar to students in a classroom. The forced introduction of hybrid teaching during a certain period served as a life laboratory of that phenomenon and blatantly confirmed it. The author could observe in his HEI that the discrepancy of involvement − in the same lecture − between students present in the classroom and online students was immense. In fact, it was as if the latter were just absent, even in terms of responding to active solicitations. In the same vein, Moorhouse (2020) observed that [t]he VCS [Video Conferencing Software] sessions are still more “bumpy” and teacher-centred than face-to-face sessions. Group and whole-class discussions are characterised by longer silences and shorter student responses. This is made harder because of the large class size and students turning their cameras off due to privacy concerns, limiting paralinguistic communication. The lesser involvement of the audience is a problem per se of course, as it is well known that monologues are more boring than lively debates. But what’s more, it triggers another problem. Compounded by the fact that a negotiator or a

Online Teaching in HEIs vs. Online International Negotiation    41 teacher does not see, or in the best case barely sees, the participants, it implies that it becomes much more difficult for a negotiator or a teacher to know whether the audience is following the conversation, whether people stay focused and understand, and more generally what are the audience’s specific needs. In other words, the constraint on the means of communication arises in both directions: the teacher (negotiator) lacks the means of non-verbal communication needed to make himself well understood, and at the same time he lacks the feedback from the audience. Englund, Olofsson, and Price (2017) provide the testimony of a teacher who experienced communication as challenging and stated that [t]o check that students have understood. […] That can sometimes be very, very difficult on an online course. Communication is important; there are so many different students, from different backgrounds. They describe this teacher as positive about online teaching and as developing a more student-focused approach. No wonder that all too often, participants to an online lecture or negotiation are not quite on the same page both during the session and after it is concluded in terms of what are the takeaways from it. The risk of literally “losing” the audience in the course of the lecture is a very real one online, as real as in a negotiation especially a plurilateral one. Losing the audience means that though participants are still technically connected, the message does no longer get across to at least part of them. Losing the audience or rather some of the participants may also occur for technical reasons. Though computer technology is performing well, it is sometimes also is relatively heavy and cumbersome. For example, switching from one functionality or conferencing configuration to another may take much more time than corresponding in-class procedures. When a process is very interactive, such as a large multilateral conference, online synchronous distributed negotiations, or an interactive class, this may be an issue to take into consideration. In negotiations a lot goes on “in the corridors.” Similarly in university teaching, especially in smaller formats such as private international universities, a sizeable interaction between professor and students happens during breaks or immediately after a lecture. It is not uncommon to have students even queuing after a class. According to the author’s online teaching experience, during the first days of the pandemic after-class discussion continued to take place but soon disappeared. However, this does not mean that the need for it disappeared. Actually, exactly the same may be said of negotiating sessions. One may wonder why. Possibly, part of the reason has to do with the fact that if by the end of a lecture (or a negotiation) participants wish to talk with the teacher (or with a negotiator), it is very natural and does not bother anyone if participants stay somewhere in the room and chat with colleagues while waiting for their turn. Waiting online unavoidably means that you are listening to another’s bilateral discussion − a quite uncomfortable situation.

42    Christian Pauletto Breaks are also the ideal moment to assess the state of play of the session. Typically, the educator would approach few students and ask if everything was clear, whether the pace of teaching is right, and so on. In the absence of such informal opportunities in virtual meetings, the instructor will be significantly less able to adapt to the circumstances of the ongoing session.

6. Approaches to Mitigating Undesired Impacts This section addresses the following question: What are the good practices and tricks used by diplomats in online negotiations in order to optimize the negotiating process? It elaborates on how undesired impacts depicted in the previous section are mitigated in online negotiations. Again, the content of this section is essentially informed by negotiating practice.

6.1. A Robust and Seamless Preparation To mitigate the risks described in the previous section, one major lesson from online negotiation is to devote much more time for preparing a session. To be effective, an online negotiator needs to prepare his online session very carefully and fine-tune every aspect. This is because once online, a smooth rolling-out of the process becomes essential and improvization is problematic. What does that mean concretely? First, negotiators and especially the lead negotiator or chair need to be prepared to spell out clearly at the session’s outset what are the purpose, the objective and modalities of the session and make sure that all participants share the same understanding. Compared to an in-person session, an online session without modalities that are clearly understood in detail and in their entirety by all sides may soon get out of control. Any departures from the agreed modalities as well, even minute ones, shall be explicitly made aware of. For example, if during an in-person session one party needs more time than planned to reflect on a question, the other party or parties will simply see it and understand. Online, failing to explain beforehand one’s need for taking more time quickly becomes a source of annoyance. Because it becomes crucial for modalities to be well understood they should be communicated, in detail or in general terms, ahead of the session through written procedure, to the extent practicable. Furthermore, the session should be planned in such a way as to minimize switching back and forth between functionalities or speakers. A seamless process permits to minimize the loss of participants’ attention and prevents wasting precious time. Seamlessness is a core aspect of online negotiation which was not much of an issue in traditional negotiation.

6.2. Focused Speech Not only the aims and modalities must be spelled out with precision and detail. Communication during an online session should always be particularly focused

Online Teaching in HEIs vs. Online International Negotiation    43 and straightforward. This is necessary to offset the lack of non-verbal language that otherwise helps the audience to correctly interpret the message of the speaker.

6.3. Appreciation Togetherness, informal moments, and the vast spectrum of non-verbal means of communication provide ample ways to share satisfaction among participants. In online settings, their absence needs to be compensated. In the author’s own experience, a good negotiating practice is to redouble the explicit signs of appreciation. Simple statements such as “I appreciate it,” or “We are making good progress,” or “We are on the right track” are often enough to compensate for the lack of physical interactions serving that purpose.

6.4. Focus and Motivation Keeping concentrated during long hours (or days) of diplomatic negotiation is a challenge for every participant, and more so if there are long sequences of speech. The fact is that in a negotiation, negotiators are eager to explain as thoroughly as possible their views, thinking, and arguments, which takes time. In traditional negotiating settings, negotiators have a tendency to prefer taking the opportunity to explain their reasons and arguments viva voce before submitting written material to the other party. For example, to present a new proposal orally first and then in writing. A useful practice when migrating a negotiation online is to rely less on oral in-session explanations and more on submitting written material ahead of the session to the other parties, so to say “for self-study.” The material may consist in proposals, domestic laws and regulations, policy papers, other background papers, etc. An educator would immediately think of the concept of the flipped classroom, and this is precisely what the next section will look at.

6.5. Pre-recorded Videos In particular in large multilateral conferences, some ways of circumventing the sometimes cumbersome rigidity of technology have proved effective. In such large and lengthy processes, a well-established routine by now is that speakers would record their interventions to have them ready to be switched on from the conference’s control room at the precise instant when the floor becomes theirs. This avoids the unbearable waste of time in trying to make sure the speaker is there and everyone does hear him. We all experienced that.

7. Transferability This section explores how the good practices identified in the previous section are transferable into a teaching environment, and whether they may optimize the teaching process. Obviously, the previous section has focused on precisely those mitigation techniques that are more likely to be transferable from negotiation to education, deliberately leaving aside those that have no relevance for teaching.

44    Christian Pauletto 7.1. A Robust and Seamless Preparation The first general online good practice from the previous section seems to be transferable one-to-one. The Covid-19 experience quickly proved that to avoid a failed lecture the complete lecture must be more carefully prepared, planned and finetuned. The entire rolling out of the class should be determined in advance. What’s more, this plan and the rollout need to be presented to students at the very start of the class or module. The teacher must be prepared to start by explaining what the purpose of the class or module is, what are the teaching modalities, what are the expectations. Efforts must be made to ensure that all students will be able to make sense of what will happen during the session; to understand why it is organized in the way it is and what is the sense of it all. Why that? The reasons are the same as in negotiation, that is: ⦁⦁ firstly because with this, students will be able to fill by themselves the informal

(non-verbal) guidance normally provided by the instructor during a physical meeting; ⦁⦁ second, in order to stockpile motivation among students and minimize the risk of losing the audience, given that in an online setting the means of controlling motivation and effective attendance are compromised; ⦁⦁ finally, a clear rollout and modalities are needed to avoid misunderstandings that have more disruptive consequences online than in-person.

For example, if a 15-minute group case study is planned during the class, the professor would need to more carefully spell out beforehand what the exact modalities of such group work are to make sure that no one will be confused in the process. Once the groups are split online, “jumping” into the group work in order to clarify some organizational details is either simply no longer feasible, or would seriously disrupt the process. As in online negotiating practice, the teaching session should be as seamless as possible from its start to its end, in order to retain students’ attention. In the above example, the faculty should avoid giving the impression, once the time for group work is over, to figure out how to proceed, but should instead move on straight and seamlessly as set out in the course modalities. In a school environment too, instructors should not hesitate to send out modalities ahead of the online class (even though experience shows that students may be less diligent in studying them compared to negotiators). Doing so, and periodically sending e-mails recalling modalities and other procedural information, would also create a sense of presence, which is often missing in an online educational programme. Tight planning may in turn lead to another difficulty. Because everything is so well prepared and fine-tuned, students do not dare anymore to interfere. This reduces the quality of immediate feedback both ways, students to faculty and faculty to students. This needs to be offset by an increase use of ex-post feedback tools, such as short quizzes or self-tests. Also in the negotiating setting a major loss that occurs in virtual sessions is in terms of on-the-spot feedback.

Online Teaching in HEIs vs. Online International Negotiation    45 A more serious challenge is in terms of educator’s/negotiator’s adaptability. If some parameters happen to change just before or during the class compared to what was anticipated during the course preparation, it is less easy to adjust, simply because too many things have been fine-tuned. The aforementioned strong advice “not to depart” from the modalities shared with the students needs to be understood stricto sensu, but this also entails some cost. More generally (and beyond the difficulty of undertaking short term or on-thespot adjustments), setting the online course procedures and functionalities in great detail and communicating them in equally great detail to students may have a downside. The downside is that the instructors feel compelled to carry over the same procedures and functionalities all along the teaching programme, in order to avoid misunderstanding, and to save time and money. This reduces the variety in teaching method, introduces undue rigidity and standardization; exactly the same way as negotiators frequently observe during online negotiations. Thus, the organization of online classes must be approached with a long-run perspective. This requires an additional anticipation effort.

7.2. Focused Speech Just as online negotiators, professors should adapt their speech to an online audience and get used to formulate their messages in a more focused and straightforward manner. The main risk in an online session is in fact a very simple one: to get misunderstood or misinterpreted.

7.3. Appreciation As in negotiation, marks of appreciation gain huge importance online. Appreciation pertains to several aspects of teaching, whether the course of the session in general, the class collectively or individual students. The professor has to never miss an opportunity to express verbally and explicitly his appreciation, given the impossibility to express it through all other means. This may include appreciation of how fast the session progresses, how well the thought material was then implemented in group works, or how relevant a student’s remark was. The professor should constantly keep that in mind and not fear he is pushing it too far.

7.4. Focus and Motivation Just as in online negotiation, because students’ attention and focus are a major challenge of online teaching, specific means to address this should be implemented. As alluded to in the previous section, one such means is the flipped classroom. The concept of flipped classroom is not new, but it gained attention during the pandemic. As many other fellows, the author of this chapter experienced it in his teaching in 2021, in a phase when his HEI was implementing hybrid teaching. He instructed his class to study their textbook mainly in self-study as a basis for classes that gave much more room for group works based on pre-established assignments. According to the end-of-year module feedback made by students, it

46    Christian Pauletto seems that this method enjoyed a high degree of satisfaction, though a number of respondents stated that they missed the in-class lecturing. That being said, it must also be noted at this juncture that during this period (and probably for several reasons, not only the flipped teaching) the overall quality of the final essays submitted by students was significantly below the historical benchmark for the same teaching module.

7.5. Pre-Recorded Videos The use of video-recorded material is less easily transferable from a negotiating into a teaching context. Having the teacher’s lecture recorded on video and then imparted to the students would radically modify the teaching modalities, and change them from synchronous to asynchronous. However, there may be specific opportunities, such as the presentation that students use to do in traditional classes. The previous section has mentioned the technology-induced complications that arise when passing the (virtual) “floor” to individual speakers in a multilateral negotiation. The exercise would be equally cumbersome and risky when passing the floor to successive students making live presentations in an online class. For that specific purpose, the best option may well be for students to consign beforehand the electronic file containing their video presentation. If the pedagogic objective of having presentations by students is mainly to test their capacity of conducting individual research, pre-recorded videos are good enough. If, however, the pedagogical objective is to train their public speaking ability, there is a caveat. Not feeling the stress (or emotion) of having to act live biases the whole exercise, let alone the possibility for the student to calmly record multiple attempts and pick up the best sequences. This chapter was introduced with a succinct reminder of the digital divide. Obviously, the HEI should carefully assess how feasible it is for students to produce video recorded material of their own, and whether a level playing field prevails among students from different socio-economic backgrounds.

8. Unresolved Challenges The previous sections tried to show that there are tricks and practices from negotiation that may help overcome many disadvantages of virtual meetings or classes while preserving their advantages. This section explores whether there are similarities of another kind between negotiation and teaching, namely common challenges resulting from online engagement that are difficult to solve. One relates to intercultural exposure. Negotiation typically involves teams from different cultures. Thus, in-person rounds of negotiations are a key to success as they allow negotiators to get to know and understand the other team’s or teams’ culture and country. Cultural background is expressed through various forms in human interaction. In a mere online chat thread and even in online oral communication this variety becomes difficult to notice. However, this is not so face-to-face where each one has to learn how different cultures translate into

Online Teaching in HEIs vs. Online International Negotiation    47 different attitudes, behaviors, codes, non-verbal communication and an infinite spectrum of other aspects from the very first second to the very last one in interpersonal engagement. HEIs and in particular international universities play a key role in starting building up such skills early on by mixing resident and foreign students. In virtual education, even if participants are located in various countries, students lack such persistent direct exposure to other cultures. The day they enter into the job market, this would unavoidably be a minus. Probably not unrelated to the above, another phenomenon that occurs in the early phase of a negotiating process is a number of preconceived ideas on each other’s stance. Quite some time should ideally be invested by a negotiator to detect the other participants’ (and one’s own) preconceived ideas and rectify them. In many disciplines of academia, for example in international relations studies, students come with preconceived ideas. Miller (2014, p. 22) made the same observation in relation to psychology studies. Direct in-class interaction, including non-verbal feedback from students, or informal exchanges during breaks, allow to detect and rectify preconceived views. When meeting virtually, this crucial task becomes difficult to perform. Another difficult issue is what Miller (2014) calls “dysfunctional multitasking,” i.e., the popular belief that the human brain is able to do two things at the same time. As Miller puts it, “the other surefire way to sabotage a cognitive process is to combine it with another attention-grabbing activity, concretely online learning is always going to be particularly vulnerable to dysfunctional behaviors such as alternating instant messaging, e-mail, videos, and social networking with the learning activity at hand. This behavior is hard enough to police in the face-to-face classroom, let alone in the typical online environment. The same may be said of negotiators. Miller proposes to address this plague by ensuring a gap-free teaching. This can certainly help. On campus, injunctions to switch off mobile phones may also help, while some educational institutions had to go as far as disabling the reception signal of mobile telephony. But such measures are not applicable online. Hybrid sessions, as defined in Section 2, are another challenge in both negotiation and teaching. It is difficult to simultaneously fulfill all needs of online participants and in-person participants. For example, emphasizing non-verbal communication for the latter but avoiding it for the benefit of the former. Kohnke and Moorhouse (2021) provide the following two testimonies on the complexity of hybrid teaching: I usually [i.e. tradition classroom education] look around the classroom and notice if the teacher is talking to another student, but now [hybrid teaching] the teacher is sitting behind his desk talking to another student on Zoom, and I’m in the classroom. I[t’]s hard to get his attention; and:

48    Christian Pauletto I can’t work well like this [hybrid teaching]. So, the teacher is in the classroom with my group partner, so we have to communicate on Zoom and try to get the teacher to join our breakout room. Sometimes, my partner asks him a question in the classroom and needs to fill me in [on] what he said, and I feel that something might be lost. It is not really efficient; I feel it takes a lot longer to do things. One aspect which is often overlooked in literature on negotiating and learning modalities pertains to personal development. As a matter of fact, literature on remote teaching often notes that this mode is preferred by students who feel uneasy in a class and are somehow shy to speak up or to communicate orally. While such students do exist, the right approach should precisely consist in helping them overcome this hurdle, which is not what an online learning programme would achieve. Those students are the ones who would benefit more from in-class teaching for acquiring the necessary speaking skills through guided practice. In the negotiating profession, the same consideration applies to young negotiators who are stressed at the idea of having to find on the spot and in public not only the accurate response but, more importantly, the right way and tone to convey it. Oddly, the same may sometimes apply to teachers. In their investigation, Bergstrand and Savage (2013) obtained the perhaps counterintuitive finding that “the switch to online classes actually results in [comparatively] better evaluations [by students] for teachers who typically perform poorly in the classroom.” Probably, poor teaching skills are more obvious in-class than online. Last but clearly not least, there is one challenge that remains a mystery. As a negotiator, entering the negotiating room where I would sit for negotiating a treaty was always a source of emotions and intense stimulation. Similarly, during my studies at the Swiss Institute of Technology, entering this magnificent, inspiring building was a source of motivation from the first to the last day of study. There is simply some magic in this and a source of emulation. Just think of seeing Botticelli’s paintings on your screen versus seeing them “for real” in Florence. Miller’s (2014) way to put it is so true: Even the most sophisticated forms of online communication can’t replicate the motivating force of being in a classroom surrounded by other students engaged in the work, their enthusiasm sustained by the personal presence of a dedicated, inspiring instructor. I know some people who could “see” the Pope, and years or decades later spoke emotionally about their unique feeling. They could equally see him on TV, but…. Simple negotiators or professors by far do not possess the magnetizing energy of the Pope. But still, presence plays a fundamental role in human psyche.

9. Conclusion The worldwide forced migration to online teaching during the Covid-19 pandemic has shown that there is a gap between online education and on campus education.

Online Teaching in HEIs vs. Online International Negotiation    49 In many private schools, the students complained that they had to pay the same tuition fee in spite of receiving “just” online programme, and in general it became clear that, all other things being equal, people would pay less for online than for on-campus learning. Educational authorities expressed worries that employers and the labor market would undervalue the 2020/2021 cohort of students, and in general it became clear that the market tends to value differently online and inclass certificates and credentials. Because the teaching was imparted online rather than in-class many educational institutions decided to adjust (downwards) the level of requirement for the final exams, or gave injunctions to faculty to be more lenient than normal in their assessment and grading of students. While in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic and restrictive sanitary measures many HEIs around the world had to switch directly from a total absence of online activities to almost exclusive online teaching, by contrast, in international negotiation, some degree of online activities had been routinely practised for at least one decade. Informed by extensive and first-hand practical experience in both fields, this chapter has investigated whether online international negotiation practice displays features that are transferable to online teaching practice. After showing the similarities between both fields of practice, the chapter has identified the challenges posed by a migration from face-to-face negotiation/ teaching to an online setting. The research concludes that in both cases changes in methods are indispensable during such migration process. As much as one would not negotiate in the same manner online, one would not teach in the same manner online. The need for adaptation and adjustment thus goes well beyond the technical dimension. The main required change is that in the online context the preparation of a session, whether for negotiation or teaching, must be much more careful and fine-tuned. While a highly seasoned negotiator or teacher may enter the negotiating room or classroom without a specific preparation of the session, this will definitely not do in an online context, even for people who master the art of improvization. Besides, much more care must be lent to precisely describing the objectives, approach and entire rolling out of the session. The professor respectively the lead negotiator will need to explain very explicitly what the modalities of the session are, for example what are the exact modalities for a 15-minute group case study during the class. Compared to an in-person session, an online session without modalities clearly understood by all sides may soon get out of control. Any departures from the agreed modalities as well, even minute ones, shall be explicitly made aware of. Actively managing the motivation and participation of the audience is a challenge common to online negotiation and teaching. Best practices such as increasing the amount of written material shared ahead of a negotiating session can, and actually are, transferable to teaching. Submission of pre-recorded video material seems trickier, but is advisable for specific purposes. Alternative ways to share marks of appreciation and satisfaction in spite of the absence of informal moments are easily transferable from negotiation to teaching, provided the protagonists are firmly convinced of the merits thereof. Scholarly literature already shows how the experience in other fields such as online gaming or social networks may be transferable to online education.

50    Christian Pauletto The present study contributes to this debate on transferability with experiences stemming from a neglected field, international negotiation.

References Abdul Razak, A., Izani, M. I., Abidin, Z., & Connolly, T. M. (2019). Transitioning to digital games-based learning: The case of Scottish Universities. In A. Visvizi, M. Lytras, & A. Sarirete (Eds.), Management and administration of higher education institutions at times of change, (Emerald Studies in Higher Education, Innovation and Technology) (Chapter 11, pp. 151–165). Emerald Publishing Limited. doi:10.1108/978-1-78973627-420191009 Adnan, M., & Anwar, K. (2020). Online learning amid the COVID-19 pandemic: Students’ perspectives. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology, 2(1), 4551. doi:10.33902/JPSP.2020261309 Babatunde Adedoyin, O., & Soykan, E. (2020). Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: The challenges and opportunities. Interactive Learning Environments, online 2.9.2020. doi:10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180 Badia, A., García, C., & Meneses, J. (2019). Emotions in response to teaching online: Exploring the factors influencing teachers in a fully online university. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 56(4), 446–457. doi:10.1080/14703297. 2018.1546608 Baran, E., Correia, A.-P., & Thompson, A. (2011). Transforming online teaching practice: Critical analysis of the literature on the roles and competencies of online teachers. Distance Education, 32(3), 421–439. doi:10.1080/01587919.2011.610293 Bergstrand, K., & Savage, S. V. (2013). The chalkboard versus the avatar: Comparing the effectiveness of online and in-class courses. Teaching Sociology, 41(3), 294–306. Denis, B., Watland, P., Pirotte, S., & Verday, N. (2004). Role and competencies of the e-tutor. In Networked learning 2004: A research based conference on networked learning and lifelong learning: Proceedings of the Proceedings of the fourth international conference (pp. 150–157), Lancaster, April 2004. Englund, C., Olofsson, A. D., & Price, L. (2017). Teaching with technology in higher education: Understanding conceptual change and development in practice. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(1), 73–87. doi:10.1080/07294360.2016. 1171300 Hamid, S., Waycott, J., Kurnia, S., & Chang, S. (2015). Understanding students’ perceptions of the benefits of online social networking use for teaching and learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 26, 1–9. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.004 Hartt, M., Hosseini, H., & Mostafapour, M. (2020). Game on: Exploring the effectiveness of game-based learning. Planning Practice & Research, 35(5), 589–604. doi:10.1080/ 02697459.2020.1778859 Hass, A., & Joseph, M. (2018). Investigating different options in Course delivery – traditional vs online: Is there another option? The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 35(4), 230–239. Hung, H.-T., & Chi-Yin Yuen, S. (2010). Educational use of social networking technology in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(6), 703–714. doi:10.1080/ 13562517.2010.507307 Hunt, A. N. (2018). Pedagogical techniques for creating a community of inquiry in online learning environments. In M. L. Kozimor-King & J. Chin (Eds.), Learning from each other: Refining the practice of teaching in higher education (pp. 27–39). Oakland, CA: University of California Press.

Online Teaching in HEIs vs. Online International Negotiation    51 Kohnke, L., & Moorhouse, B. L. (2021). Adopting HyFlex in higher education in response to COVID-19: Students’ perspectives. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 36(3), 231–244. doi:10.1080/02680513.2021.1906641 Kordrostami, M., & Seitz, V. (2021). Faculty online competence and student affective engagement in online learning. Marketing Education Review. doi:10.1080/1052800 8.2021.1965891 Lehman, R. M., & Conceição, S. (2010). Creating a sense of presence in online teaching: How to “be there” for distance learners. San Franscisco: Jossey-Bass. ISBN:9780470564905. Mehall, S. (2021). Purposeful interpersonal interaction and the point of diminishing returns for graduate learners. The Internet and Higher Education, 48. doi:10.1016/ j.iheduc.2020.100774 Miller, M. D. (2014). Minds online: Teaching effectively with technology (279 pp). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN: 978-0674368248. Moorhouse, B. L. (2020). Adaptations to a face-to-face initial teacher education course ‘forced’ online due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Education for Teaching, 46(4), 609–611. doi:10.1080/02607476.2020.1755205 Naylor, D., & Nyanjom, J. (2021). Educators’ emotions involved in the transition to online teaching in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 40(6), 1236–1250. doi:10.1080/07294360.2020.1811645 Pauletto, C. (2022). Numérisation de l’éducation et Société 4.0 [Digital Learning and Society 4.0]. In E. Paul & P. Demierre (Eds.), Smart à tout prix ? Défis de la numérisation au temps de la Covid-19 [Smart at any cost? The challenges of digitalisation in the time of Covid-19] (Collection débats et documents, (26), pp. 16–20). Lausanne: Fondation Jean Monnet pour l’Europe (FJME). ISSN 2296-7710. Pauletto, C. (2023). Addressing the digital divide in online education: Lessons to be drawn from online negotiation. In A. Visvizi, O. Troisi, & M. Grimaldi (Eds.), Research and Innovation Forum (Rii Forum) 2022. Rupture, resilience and recovery in the post-covid world, Springer Proceedings in Complexity (SPCOM). Cham: Springer (forthcoming). Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., & Kinzer, C. K. (2015). Foundations of game-based learning. Educational Psychologist, 50(4), 258–283. doi:10.1080/00461520.2015.1122533 Randi, J., & Corno, L. (2021). Addressing student motivation and learning experiences when taking teaching online. Theory Into Practice. doi:10.1080/00405841.2021.1932158 Rice, M. F., & Deschaine, M. E. (2020). Orienting toward teacher education for online environments for all students. The Educational Forum, 84(2), 114–125. doi:10.1080/ 00131725.2020.1702747 Saner, R. (1997). Verhandlungstechnik: Strategie Taktik Motivation Verhalten Delegationsführung. Bern Stuttgart Wien: Haupt Verlag. ISBN:978-3-258-07297-5. Tichavsky, L., Hunt, A. N., Jicha, K., & Driscoll, A. (2015). “It’s Just Nice Having a Real Teacher”: Student perceptions of online versus face-to-face instruction. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (IJSOTL), 9(2), 1–8. UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning (UIL). (2016). Closing the gap-opportunities for distance education to benefit adult learners in higher education. Hamburg: UIL. Retrieved from https://unevoc.unesco.org/home/TVETipedia+Glossary/lang=en/filt= all/id=187 Visvizi, A., Daniela, L., & Chen, C.-W. (2020). Beyond the ICT- and sustainability hypes: A case for quality education. Computers in Human Behavior, 107(June), 106304. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2020.106304 Visvizi, A., Jussila, J., Lytras, M., & Ijäs, M. (2020). Tweeting and mining OECD-related microcontent in the post-truth era: A cloudbased app. Computers in Human Behavior, 107(June), 105958. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.022 Visvizi, A., Lytras, M., & Daniela, L. (Eds.) (2019). The future of innovation and technology in education: Policies and practices for teaching and learning excellence, (In particular the introduction: “The Future of Innovation and Technology in Education: A Case for Restoring the Role of the Teacher as a Mentor”). Bingley: Emerald. ISBN:978-1-78756-556-2.

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 4

PANCOE: A Fresh Alternative to Post-Covid-19 Challenges in Education: The Case of Tourism Education Alejandra Zuccoli and Maximiliano E. Korstanje Abstract Some authors have alerted on the state of crisis generated by Covid-19 in the tourism industry worldwide. The restrictive measures disposed by governments generated not only an unparalleled economic crisis but also serious social maladies in society and education (i.e., higher dropout rates and low academic grades). Needless to say that the tourism education was in crisis much time earlier than the Covid-19 pandemic. Echoing Sigala and Ratten, the authors hold the pungent thesis that Covid-19 introduced a new opportunity to reform the epistemology and the basis of the tourism education curricula. Centerd on the role played by pleasure and joy, which is boosted by the digital technologies, this chapter synthesizes the findings of PANCOE, a successful experiment conducted by the University of Palermo, Argentina, to reduce the dropout rates while improving students’ academic performance. The experiment was drawn and applied in the years before and after the pandemic. Results show how pleasure plays a vital role giving students better opportunities in contexts of fear and deprivation. Keywords: PANCOE; tourism education; Covid-19; pleasure; academic performance; digital technology

1. Introduction The problem of education, as well as the current education crisis, is far from being new; it was originally denounced by French Sociologist Emile Durkheim in his Moving Higher Education Beyond Covid-19: Innovative and Technology-Enhanced Approaches to Teaching and Learning, 53–63 Copyright © 2023 by Alejandra Zuccoli and Maximiliano E. Korstanje Published under exclusive licence by Emerald Publishing Limited doi:10.1108/978-1-80382-517-520231004

54    Alejandra Zuccoli and Maximiliano E. Korstanje seminal book which entitles Education and Sociology. In his text, Durkheim holds the thesis that behind the crisis of education lies a rupture between the social institutions and the labor market. Education, after all, trains the future workforce to occupy a specific role in the labor market. For Durkheim, the turn of the nineteenth century witnessed new roles and problems capitalism must resolve (Durkheim, 1956). Having said this, the same discoveries done by Durkheim in his days very well apply to the current education crisis that keeps the western educators awake. Durkheim not only shed light on the pathways of future sociologists but laid the foundations toward a new understanding of education (Bourdieau & Passeron, 1990; Musgrave, 2017; Shilling, 1992). Besides, education is based on a dualism where emotions are subordinated to the rational reasoning. This Cartesian dualism occupied a central position in the configuration of curricula in the fields of management studies. One of the problems of education adopted by tourism experts has been the Cartesian dualism between the power of the mind and emotions. Classic education emphasized systematically the importance of cognitive skills over emotions. This was precisely one of the limitations of tourism education today (Zuccoli, Seraphin, & Korstanje, 2021). At a closer look, the literature suggests that other key factors contribute directly to the current crisis in tourism education. These include: (i) the gap between theory and practice which dissociates the necessities of the industry from what is being taught in classrooms (Ruhanen, 2006); (ii) the adoption of economy-based paradigms which excluded other voices, methods and knowledge (Airey, Tribe, Benckendorff, & Xiao, 2015); (iii) the frustration of students when they are recruited as staff member or enter in the labor market, as the students are often subject to excessive working hours or low-paid wages (Norrild & Korstanje, 2021); and (iv) the lack of updating and enhancement in some pregraduate tourism curricula (Chathoth & Sharma, 2007). All these problems were originally addressed by Jafar Jafari and Brent Ritchie (1981). Per their stance, educators not only pay little attention to the external factors and its derived components operating beyond the control of the tourist system but also misjudge a proper definition of tourism. The tourism industry rests on a complex interaction among hosts-guests, sub-service sectors as well as goods and infrastructure. Over the years, other social sciences have developed their own definition and understanding about the nature of tourism. Their influence still is persistent in the creation of syllabuses content and curriculum development in tourism. Then, the lack of interests for educating future researchers – instead of professional – is discussed by Jafari and Ritchie (1981) at that instance. Now, it is tempting to say that things appear not to be radically changed. To these issues, one must add the rise of global risks such as terrorism, climate change or even the recently global Covid-19 pandemic that led the tourism industry to the brink of collapse (Korstanje & George, 2022). What seems to be more important, tourism education faces a great crisis because today of Covid-19 pandemic which paradoxically represents a new opportunity to enhance higher education system as well as the curricula. While the strictest lockdowns associated with the restrictive measures aligned at stopping the infection, has put the industry between the wall and the deep blue sea, no less true is that the pandemic

PANCOE: Tourism Education    55 allowed the application of novel methods and technologies to potentiate pregraduate tourism students´ performance. This chapter deals with a new and innovative method that helps potentiating cognitive attention in tourism pregraduate students stimulating the sense through pleasure and joy. PANCOE is based on innovative techniques supporting digital technology which looks not only to standardize overseas and foreign students but also to improve students’ academic performance during the Covid-19 pandemic. The goals of the this chapter are structured in the following directions: (i) to discuss to what extent Covid accelerates a technological revolution which helps potentiating higher education institutions in the fields of tourism and hospitality; (ii) to give further insights on the potentialities of pleasure and joy to stimulate students with higher levels of frustrations; and (iii) to implement the main outcomes of PANCOE, an experiment conducted by the Joy Laboratory (Joy Labs) at the University of Palermo, Argentina in a post-Covid-19 context. It is important to note that the selected methodology and sampling is not statistically representative. For that, the obtained outcomes, though promising, cannot be extrapolated to other universes or samples.

2. Covid-19 and the Tourism Industry The Covid-19 pandemic was originally reported in China but rapidly disseminated across the world. The governments disposed of restrictive measures to contain the virus which included the airspace and border closure, accompanied by the imposition of strict lockdowns as well as social distancing. In the mid of this mayhem, the tourism industry and global commerce were seriously damaged (Koh, 2020). Scholars have not reached consensus about the future of tourism just after Covid-19. In fact, it is safe to say the real effects of the pandemic in the industry remains uncertain for experts and policy-makers (Romagosa, 2020). While some voices alert on the urgency to adopt new multidisciplinary methods to understand the consequences of the pandemic (Wen, Wang, Kozak, Liu, & Hou, 2021), others scholars applaud the pandemic as a new opportunity to a rebirth or a radical changes toward a more sustainable form of consumption (Gössling, Scott, & Hall, 2020; Higgins-Desbiolles, 2020a,b ). The fact is that digital technologies were widely employed for placating the negative impacts in tourism education. As M. Sigala (2020) notes, experts lack of clear knowledge about how the crisis accelerated by Covid-19 may positively transform while adapting tourism from desk staff and companies toward a transformative innovation to deal with the post-pandemic context. Crises are opportunities for collective innovation changing the cultural mainstream values of society. Furthermore, the Covid-19 pandemic not only brought long-lasting and devastating effects in the sub-service sectors (like tourism) but also introduced interesting advances in education fields as well as applied research that merits to be investigated. Without any doubt, tourism was the main carrier, but at the same time the main victim of Covid-19 (Gössling et al., 2020; Higgins-Desbiolles, 2020; Ratten & Jones, 2021). One of the most troublesome questions of tourism research and education is how to study tourism in a world without tourists? Franklin (2007)

56    Alejandra Zuccoli and Maximiliano E. Korstanje coins the term tourism-centricity to denote the obsession in applied research to study the attitudes, motivations and expectances of tourists as the only valid sources of knowledge while relegating other actors into the periphery. At least in the tourism fields, the curricula have adopted a strong imprint from tourist centricity as well as tourism marketing and management. As John Tribe eloquently notes, the managerial gaze associated with an economic-based theory has contributed to the formation of tourism education worldwide (Airey & Tribe, 2006). To some extent, some critical voices have alerted that tourism education is widely based on an economic-based doctrine that prioritizes the training of future staff and workforce instead of educating future researchers (Airey et al., 2015; Sheldon, Fesenmaier, & Tribe, 2011). The future global risks, which include the Covid-19, urge tourism educators to adopt new novel techniques oriented to give coherent diagnoses aimed at resolving the real problems of the industry (Belhassen & Caton, 2011; Fidgeon, 2010; Korstanje & George, 2022). The Covid-19 outbreak not only generated an unparalleled crisis but also situated the tourism industry next to the collapse. In a low-mobilities society, our travel behaviors have been substantially changed (Korstanje, 2021). The new normal witnesses a world mainly marked by migratory restrictions as well as new travel bans, without mentioning racist attitudes against Asian Tourists and geopolitical tensions among nations (Barbosa, Costa, Handayani, & Korstanje, 2021; Korstanje & George, 2022; Tzanelli, 2021). Academicians have not agreed about the future of tourism in the post-pandemic context. As Koh puts it, to some extent Covid-19 represents a unique opportunity to reverse the negative effects of over tourism and pollutions in larger urban areas. Through the articulation of a creative destruction, as Koh notes, Covid-19 leads the tourism industry toward a more sustainable form. Some studies focus on Covid-19 as an outstanding opportunity to forge a more sustainable society and tourism industry that make ecological justice (Nepal, 2020; Sigala, 2020; Stankov, Filimonau, & Vujičić, 2020), whereas others emphasize on the importance to adopt multidisciplinary research to understand its real long-lasting effects in the industry (Miles & Shipway, 2020; Wen et al., 2021). Needless to say, the future of tourism remains uncertain even to date (Romagosa, 2020). The Covid-19 pandemic activated long-dormant racist attitudes and geopolitical anxieties that transfigured the host guests’ relations (Mostafanezhad, Cheer, & Sin, 2020). It is important to mention that tourism education suffered dramatic changes during the pandemic. At a closer look, online teaching facilitated tourism education during the pandemic (Amin, Yousaf, Walia, & Bashir, 2021; Qiu, Li, & Li, 2021). In this vein, Ratten and Jones (2021) discuss to what extent the crisis accelerated by the Covid-19 pandemic activated some resources toward entrepreneurship in tourism education. This point not only opens the doors to new guidelines in applied research but also lays the foundations to shorten the gap between theory and practice. To deal with a radical shift, educators should adopt new innovative techniques to resolve the old educational problems in tourism. Many things have changed just after the Covid-19. As the authors put it, Covid-19 is more than a crisis, it engages with a new opportunity to change the tourism educational system.

PANCOE: Tourism Education    57 Amin et al. (2021) infer positive feedback of digital technologies in the selfefficacy of students as long as the Covid-19 pandemic. Per their viewpoint, the use of information and communication technology helped not only to deal with the pandemic but also replaced physical interaction to stop the proliferation of the virus. Because of Covid-19, e-learning has received further attention by educators while increasing the allocation of tourism e-programs in the Western universities. Students adopted new virtual self-efficacy and social skills in the new virtual landscapes accelerated by Covid-19 (cf. Daniela & Visvizi, 2021). Echoing the above-noted argument, Tiwari, Seraphin, and Chowdhary (2020) applaud that digital technology contributed directly to stimulating education in the pandemic though – as they recognize – researchers have paid little attention to this issue. As an essential part of the tourism industry, educational institutions worked hard to reinvent the syllabuses before the challenges posed by Covid-19. Educators should adopt what experts dubbed as “ambidextrous management” which means the delivery of courses open to a variety of modalities toward a new form of innovation. For Edelheim (2020), the successful recovery of the industry depends upon the need of transforming the cultural values of society. The pandemic not only shakes the foundations of the industry toward a more sustainable form of consumption, but it is also an opportunity to break the cultural values of neoliberalism. In consonance with this, Higgins-Desbiolles (2020) speaks to us of more ethical tourism. Ye and Law (2021) argue that technical teams should keep updated the tourism educators about the changes and new resolutions to deal with the pandemic. At the same time, the evaluation tests and forms should be at least revisited in view of the new times. Some psychological support should be given to educators and students to placate the devastating effects of lockdown in the mind. In this respect, game-based theory offers a fertile ground to boost tourism education in the pandemic. Nair (2021) acknowledges that Covid-19’s disruptions can be successfully regulated and reversed endorsing to gamification pedagogy. Gamification has advantages and disadvantages. Nair enumerates a set of benefits of using gamification pedagogy in tourism education, which include the urgency to respect human diversity, as well as the simplification of traditional assessment or enhancing engagement. In this respect, Zhong, Busser, Shapoval, and Murphy (2021) call attention to the power of engagement to reduce students’ discomfort while enhancing career loyalties. Hope and academic satisfaction are key factors for the optimization of students´ engagement despite the pandemic. Each pandemic not only puts the tourism industry but also tourism education in jeopardy. The Covid-19 outbreak potentiated the weaknesses of tourism education in western and eastern universities. The different imposed restrictions forced professors to suspend classes, tours or even internships. In fact, digital technology was not enough to bolster fluid communication between students and the academic community (peers and instructors). Students´ satisfaction seems to be given by the success of educators to create new (more) flexible programs well-versed with engagement efforts. Positive sentiments as hope lead to optimizing better performance outcomes. Authors enumerate three factors which correlate with students´

58    Alejandra Zuccoli and Maximiliano E. Korstanje engagement, to say, discussion with other peers, transparent feedback or interface and high-quality interaction with instructors or tutors. Although the concept of resilience has been widely studied in the Academia, there is no firm basis to understand the crisis when it is happening. Tourism education failed systematically to educate professionals to think resilience strategies that ameliorate the underway state of crisis. This is particularly true in underdeveloped economies (Abbass, Essmallgee, & Cooshna-Gunputh, 2021; Suneeth, Kashyap, Reddy, & Kaushal, 2021) as well low-resilient destinations seriously devastated by the pandemic or destinations whose organic image has been harmed by previous virus outbreaks (Gupta & Sahu, 2021; Sharma, Thomas, & Paul, 2021). Because of time and space, we are unable to review all the material and literature that describes how Covid-19 impacted tourism education. To understand the real impact of Covid-19 in Academia knowledge production, Zopiatis, Pericleous, Theofanous (2021) had conducted a full review on more than 300 published papers just after the pandemic. They highlight a future agenda based for tourism research and education in five pillars: tourist expenditure forecasting; post-Covid-19 education curricula; experiential learning in the post-Covid-19; digital customer relations; and post-crisis and resilience practices. The future of tourism education, anyway, still remains uncertain. The challenges are posed on the complex interaction of customers and service sectors with the new global risks that hurt the industry. Covid-19, which is one of them, offers opportunities and dangers for the years to come. Tourism education should be updated and adapted to these new settings. The specialized literature rests on the direct impacts of Covid-19 on the current education crisis but less attention is given to the role of emotionality and joy which are fruitful to mitigate the negative effects of fear and uncertainness. To fill the gap, the following two sections clearly describe the steps and outcomes obtained by the Joy Labs with pregraduate tourism students in Buenos Aires Argentina.

3. The Joy Labs and PANCOE at University of Palermo, Argentina The limitations of what Franklin baptised as tourist centricity is placed into the foreground. Complementarily the second part gives clarity on the lack of updating in the academic curricula to educate the future tourism and hospitality staff. The industry is facing serious global risks (like the Covid-19 pandemic) which threaten directly its functioning and future. The next workforce should be reeducated in a new post-Covid-19 context where resiliency and adaption occupy a central position. The PANCOE method is a successful instrument to standardize not only academic performance but also boost cognitive attention. The method is oriented to reduce the students´ dropout rates as well as potentiating their skills. In so doing, PANCOE is based on the appliance of digital technology disposed to create pleasurable experiences in students. It is important to mention that PANCOE is part of the Joy Labs depending on the University of Palermo, Argentina. The experiment, which began in 2012, is ultimately narrated in two facets: the pre-pandemic days which goes from 2012

PANCOE: Tourism Education    59 to 2018, and the new applications during the pandemic (2019–2020). As stated in different parts of this chapter, the obtained outcome are exciting and promising but they cannot be extrapolated to other universes simply because the sample is not statistically representative. Last but not least, PANCOE was finalist for Re-imagine Education Awards 2016 (held by Wharton College). The present section synthesizes the preliminary findings of PANCOE, a successful experiment headed by Joy Labs at the University of Palermo, Buenos Aires Argentina. Combining positive sentiment like pleasure with joy, PANCOE is mainly marked by the goals of standardizing frustrated students or foreign students who move in an uncertain landscape. At the same time, PANCOE is based to reduce the current high academic dropout rates. Joy Labs, in this vein, trains students through the use of digital technologies to achieve pleasurable experiences. Centered on the needs of stimulating academic performance and grades in students who take part in the first year of tourism bachelor, the section describes the importance of pleasure by enhancing abilities and skills in tourism education and tourism marketing. Students were subject to a pleasurable experience like cooking, kneading pieces of bread, or even tasting some cultural dishes and drinks over almost 18 encounters which took place from 2012 to 2018. The case was organized according to two different samples formed by 10–20 participants. Each group was followed by 870 participants who use Twitter and Facebook. The experiment divides into active and passive participants. The age cohort oscillates from 18 to 25 years old. The study case combined different digital platforms combining innovative techniques in tourism education which led to being a finalist at Re-imagine Education Awards 2016 (held by Wharton College). The A group was selected by students who were previously subject to PANCOE experience while the B group are students allocated in traditional programs. Having said this, A group members were instructed to knead different pieces of bread expressing the cultural identities where they come from. Later, they opened a Twitter account inviting other peers to comment on their experiences. Each participant had 40 followers who bolstered a fluid communication about their experience, expectances and problems. In almost five meetings, participants had the opportunity to share their dishes, pieces of bread with other students and professional chefs. Lastly, participants were subject to traditional exams performed orally or in writing. The results were particularly outstanding: the memory retention increased almost 33% in participants of PANCOE in relation to those who had not taken participation in the experiment who reaches 20%. Additionally, the graduation rate was 40% in PANCOE participants and 28% in those who took traditional programs. Although preliminary because the sample was not statistically representative, these outcomes reveal interesting projections to be applied in frustrated students or students during the Covid-19 context. Not surprisingly, the applications of PANCOE to the pandemic and virtual classrooms were different in the “new normal” than in the pre-Covid-19 days. Unlike the pre-pandemic days, education in the Covid-19 pandemic was mainly marked by greater levels of mistrust, fear and anxiety (if not distress) that affected seriously students. Social distancing and virtual classrooms characterized education during the pandemic. For that reason, PANCOE, which was originally

60    Alejandra Zuccoli and Maximiliano E. Korstanje oriented to the consumption heritage and gastronomy, has taken another direction. At this time, PANCOE was chiefly centered on the need of stimulating what experts dubbed as “gamification,” which means the possibility to learn while playing with others in a dense net of rules and social norms. The sense of integration was formally given to shape a new experience in the mid of the new normal. Each classroom ignites the students´ attention according to specific-based tasks. The sample was formed by 50 students who coursed nine months from March to November 2020. These students were divided into three groups. The participants´ age cohort ranged from 18 to 23 years old. PANCOE took place every Monday for two hours while the rest of the week was reserved for classic education. The experiment, at this stage, was not limited to baking pieces of bread or cooking, it was expanded to new activities which included any activities of personal expression such as reading a book, writing poems, playing with any musical instrument and stage a play or even dancing (only to name a few). Arts occupied a vital position at this stage. Students were encouraged to hang a poster that said “do not disturb! Students in class!” In this way, students separated themselves from the rest of the home focusing their attention on what they should perform. At a later stage, each participant was encouraged to create a Twitter account and add new followers. Over weeks, participants interacted with others about their creative works engaging with a wider network which potentiates their attention. The main outcome of PANCOE during the pandemic was shared on Instagram and Facebook with other students and professors. PANCOE was aimed at potentiating students´ skills within the ALTAX method contributing to the creation of an individual space of creativity and enhancement. Each art creation was amply visualized according to the use of digital technologies and social nets. What is more important, through a pleasurable experience PANCOE ensured students attendance with more than 99% of students with less than two absences in nine months. It is important to clarify that students were not evaluated during the pandemic according to the same parameters of pre-pandemic days, in which case we cannot compare the results with the pre-pandemic context. Nevertheless, PANCOE offered interesting results showing higher levels of motivation and fewer absences in participants during the Covid-19 pandemic.

4. Conclusion The Covid-19 pandemic has not only ground the global trade to a halt but has caused serious losses and problems for the education system. Paradoxically, the restrictive measures adopted by governments to stop the virus dissemination, which included the airport and border closures as well as the social distancing and the strict lockdowns, opened the doors to digital technologies employments. However, over the recent months, some voices have alerted on the psychological problems in university students who were pressed to stay at home for a long period. In the mid of this crisis, we introduce a new methodology which is mainly marked by digital technologies to stimulate cognitive attention and academic performance in deprived students. The Joy Labs is a new emerging experiment that combines the advances of neurosciences with pleasurable experiences. Far from

PANCOE: Tourism Education    61 what specialized literature suggests, pleasure allows rapid optimization of learned skills in the educational process. Given this, the laboratory centers efforts in deciphering the necessary background to potentiate pregraduate students in tourism. The method is based on the premises of tourism marketing and management. Having said this, we have proceeded to interview the founder of the laboratory Professor Alejandra Zuccoli who argued that the laboratory started as an attempt to homogenize pregraduate students coming from different parts of the world. Besides digital technology, as she adheres, distracts students on many occasions. She toyed with the belief that students would pay further attention if they were emotionally motivated. In so doing, students cooked several dishes, kneaded bread as well as tasted different dishes and drinks. Those students who were subject to this experiment ranked notably higher in the exams than those who had not had the opportunity to take part in it. In this vein, pleasure – not pain – plays a leading role in improving the learning of new cognitive skills and abilities. Joy Labs is a center of research oriented to innovate in educative techniques to optimize the learning process. The laboratory was inaugurated at the University of Palermo, as an efficient mechanism to standardize previous skills. The laboratory of pleasure is based on an efficient experiment known as “PANCOE” where pregraduate students of tourism bachelor were subject to different pleasurable experiences mainly marked by eating, tasting dishes and non-alcohol drinks while cooking and kneading bread pieces. At a later stage, students were tested according to the protocols of the economics faculty. At a closer look, results divide into micro and macro social dimensions. Those students who have taken part in PANCOE not only obtained higher degrees but also earned their bachelor’s degrees. Having said this PANCOE situates as a promising and interesting tourism education method to be applied in zones of conflict or war, as well as over students with psychological frustration. PANCOE main outcomes are applied very well to the post-Covid-19 education crisis.

References Abbass, N. S., Essmallgee, F., & Cooshna-Gunputh, P. (2021). Adopt, adapt or perish: Re-building support systems for travel and tourism education in COVID-19 educational crisis. In V. Gowreesunkar, S. Mingi, H. Roy, & R. Micera (Eds.), Tourism destination management in a post-pandemic context (pp. 315–327). Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited. Airey, D., & Tribe, J. (Eds.). (2006). An international handbook of tourism education. Abingdon: Routledge. Airey, D., Tribe, J., Benckendorff, P., & Xiao, H. (2015). The managerial gaze: The long tail of tourism education and research. Journal of Travel Research, 54(2), 139–151. Amin, I., Yousaf, A., Walia, S., & Bashir, M. (2021). What shapes e-learning effectiveness among tourism education students? An empirical assessment during COVID-19. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 30(1), 1–15. Barbosa, R. B., Costa, J. H., Handayani, B., & Korstanje, M. E. (2021). The effects of COVID-19 in the tourist society: An anthropological insight of the trivialisation of death and life. International Journal of Tourism Anthropology, 8(2), 179–192.

62    Alejandra Zuccoli and Maximiliano E. Korstanje Belhassen, Y., & Caton, K. (2011). On the need for critical pedagogy in tourism education. Tourism Management, 32(6), 1389–1396. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture (Vol. 4). London: Sage. Caton, K. (2014). Underdisciplinarity: Where are the humanities in tourism education? Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 15, 24–33. Chathoth, P. K., & Sharma, A. (2007). Core curricular issues in hospitality and tourism education – Present structure and future directions. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 19(1), 10–19. Daniela, L., & Visvizi, A. (Eds.). (2021). Remote learning in times of pandemic. London: Routledge. Retrieved from https://www.routledge.com/Remote-Learning-in-Timesof-Pandemic-Issues-Implications-and-Best-Practice/Daniela-Visvizi/p/book/ 9780367765705 Durkheim, E. (1956). Education and sociology. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster. Edelheim, J. (2020). How should tourism education values be transformed after 2020? Tourism Geographies, 22(3), 547–554. Fidgeon, P. R. (2010). Tourism education and curriculum design: A time for consolidation and review? Tourism Management, 31(6), 699–723. Franklin, A. (2007). The problem with tourism theory. In I. Altejvic, A. Pritchard, & N. Morgan (Eds.), The critical turn in tourism studies: Innovative research methodologies (pp. 131–148). Oxford: Elsevier. Gössling, S., Scott, D., & Hall, C. M. (2020). Pandemics, tourism and global change: A rapid assessment of COVID-19. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 29(1), 1–20. Gupta, V., & Sahu, G. (2021). Reviving tourism in India post COVID-19 pandemic: Role of tourism education and training. In V. Gowreesunkar, S. Mingi, H. Roy, & R. Micera (Eds.), Tourism destination management in a post-pandemic context (pp. 303–314). Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited. Higgins-Desbiolles, F. (2020a). Socialising tourism for social and ecological justice after COVID-19. Tourism Geographies, 22(3), 610–623. Higgins-Desbiolles, F. (2020b). The “war over tourism”: Challenges to sustainable tourism in the tourism academy after COVID-19. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 29(4), 551–569. Jafari, J., & Ritchie, J. B. (1981). Toward a framework for tourism education: Problems and prospects. Annals of Tourism Research, 8(1), 13–34. Koh, E. (2020). The end of over-tourism? Opportunities in a post-Covid-19 world. International Journal of Tourism Cities, 6(4), 1015–1023. Korstanje, M., & George, B. (2022). The nature and future of Tourism: A post COVID-19 context. Palm Bay: Apple Academic Press. Korstanje, M. E. (2021). The dilemmas of the lockdown: A society in post COVID-19 days. In A. Scribano & M. Korstanje (Eds.), Emotionality of COVID-19. Now and after: The war against a virus (pp. 1–10). Hauppauge: Nova Science. Miles, L., & Shipway, R. (2020). Exploring the COVID-19 pandemic as a catalyst for stimulating future research agendas for managing crises and disasters at international sport events. Event Management, 24(4), 537–552. Mostafanezhad, M., Cheer, J. M., & Sin, H. L. (2020). Geopolitical anxieties of tourism:(Im) mobilities of the COVID-19 pandemic. Dialogues in Human Geography, 10(2), 182–186. Musgrave, P. W. (2017). The sociology of education (Vol. 40). Abingdon: Routledge. Nair, B. B. (2021). Endorsing gamification pedagogy as a helpful strategy to offset the COVID-19 induced disruptions in tourism education. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 100362. Nepal, S. K. (2020). Adventure travel and tourism after COVID-19 – Business as usual or opportunity to reset? Tourism Geographies, 22(3), 646–650.

PANCOE: Tourism Education    63 Norrild, J. A., & Korstanje, M. E. (2021). Maids and housekeepers at luxury hotels: Life stories in hotels of Buenos Aires, Argentina. International Journal of Tourism Anthropology, 8(2), 129–147. Qiu, H., Li, Q., & Li, C. (2021). How technology facilitates tourism education in COVID-19: Case study of Nankai University. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 29, 100288. Ratten, V., & Jones, P. (2021). Covid-19 and entrepreneurship education: Implications for advancing research and practice. The International Journal of Management Education, 19(1), 100432. Romagosa, F. (2020). The COVID-19 crisis: Opportunities for sustainable and proximity tourism. Tourism Geographies, 22(3), 690–694. Ruhanen, L. (2006). Bridging the divide between theory and practice: Experiential learning approaches for tourism and hospitality management education. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 5(4), 33–51. Sharma, G. D., Thomas, A., & Paul, J. (2021). Reviving tourism industry post-COVID-19: A resilience-based framework. Tourism Management Perspectives, 37, 100786. Sheldon, P. J., Fesenmaier, D. R., & Tribe, J. (2011). The tourism education futures initiative (TEFI): Activating change in tourism education. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 11(1), 2–23. Shilling, C. (1992). Reconceptualising structure and agency in the sociology of education: Structuration theory and schooling. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 13(1), 69–87. Sigala, M. (2020). Tourism and COVID-19: Impacts and implications for advancing and resetting industry and research. Journal of Business Research, 117, 312–321. Stankov, U., Filimonau, V., & Vujičić, M. D. (2020). A mindful shift: An opportunity for mindfulness-driven tourism in a post-pandemic world. Tourism Geographies, 22(3), 703–712. Suneeth, B. G., Kashyap, S., Reddy, G. M., & Kaushal, V. (2021). Resilience adaptations in tourism education for the post-COVID-19 Era – A study of India. In V. Gowreesunkar, S. Mingi, H. Roy, & R. Micera (Eds.), Tourism destination management in a post-pandemic context (pp. 291–302). Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited. Tiwari, P., Séraphin, H., & Chowdhary, N. R. (2021). Impacts of COVID-19 on tourism education: Analysis and perspectives. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 21(4), 313–338. Tzanelli, R. (2021). Cultural immobilities and the virocene: Mutating the crisis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Wen, J., Wang, W., Kozak, M., Liu, X., & Hou, H. (2021). Many brains are better than one: The importance of interdisciplinary studies on COVID-19 in and beyond tourism. Tourism Recreation Research, 46(2), 310–313. Ye, H., & Law, R. (2021). Impact of COVID-19 on hospitality and tourism education: A case study of Hong Kong. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 1–9. Zhong, Y., Busser, J., Shapoval, V., & Murphy, K. (2021). Hospitality and tourism student engagement and hope during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 1–13. Zopiatis, A., Pericleous, K., & Theofanous, Y. (2021). COVID-19 and hospitality and tourism research: An integrative review. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 48, 275–279. Zuccoli, A., Seraphin, H., & Korstanje, M. (2021). New discussions revolving around tourism education: The METHOD PANCOE, Joy Labs at the University of Palermo, Argentina. Revista Latino-Americana de Turismologia, 7(1), 1–6.

This page intentionally left blank

Part 2

Lessons the Covid-19 Pandemic Has Taught Us

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 5

Remote Learning During the Covid-19 Pandemic: Opportunities in Higher Education Daiga Kalniņa, Dita Nīmante, Sanita Baranova and Alise Oļesika Abstract Covid-19 forced the entire global education system to adapt to the new circumstances. This chapter continues the worldwide discussion on how student learning on courses and programs that were moved partially online due to remote teaching and learning in higher education institutions (HEI) during the Covid-19 pandemic was assured and what opportunities this has brought to higher education. Although there is a tendency in the theoretical literature to focus on the problems, difficulties, and challenges associated with the transition to remote learning in higher education during the pandemic, this study suggests that, contrary to the common belief, students actually identify a great number of positive issues associated with remote learning. The findings of this study highlight that students see both personal benefits and challenges in remote learning. Overall, students are satisfied with the quality of the remote teaching and learning process, and students’ positive assessment of the quality of their studies’ organization increased with age. Stability and routine were important for the students in the study process. These ensure that the study process continues uninterrupted and thus that results can be achieved. The results of this study bring us to the conclusion that the Covid-19 pandemic could be used to speed up changes in HEIs around the globe to find better and more student-centered and innovative solutions in teaching and learning in the future. Keywords: Remote learning; Covid-19; higher education; students’ experience; faculty; digital transformation

Moving Higher Education Beyond Covid-19: Innovative and Technology-Enhanced Approaches to Teaching and Learning, 67–86 Copyright © 2023 by Daiga Kalniņa, Dita Nīmante, Sanita Baranova and Alise Oļesika Published under exclusive licence by Emerald Publishing Limited doi:10.1108/978-1-80382-517-520231005

68    Daiga Kalniņa et al.

1. Introduction Due to Covid-19, the transition from face-to-face to online learning became an inevitable reality in higher education. More than 220 million students were affected when universities closed their doors due to Covid-19 (UNESCO, 2021). The global education system was affected and had to adjust to the new circumstances. UNESCO (2021) concluded that three major challenges were reported by respondents worldwide: disruption of study and campus activities, financial concerns, and health (physical and mental well-being). In Latvia, following a government decision, all HEIs had to change their work mode to remote learning in the spring of 2020 and once again in the autumn. As a result, new regulations came into force. The changes to the Latvian Education Law (Izglītības likums, Saeima, 1998) stressed that remote learning was part of the full-time educational process. Learners could study, including via the use of information and communication technologies, without being physically in the same place as the teacher (Grozījumi Izglītības likumā [Amendments to the Education Law], Saeima, 2020). Since then, HEIs have been encouraged to monitor whether the quality of studies in the online learning circumstances remains as high as before and whether students are achieving. This chapter continues the discussion on Covid-19’s effect on higher education as to how to assure student learning in courses and programs that are partially online. The authors are contributing to the literature by focusing on both the challenges and opportunities perceived by students regarding remote learning in higher education. This chapter examines the case of the University of Latvia (UL), the largest HEI in Latvia. It reveals the major challenges experienced by UL students during their remote learning and also highlights some of the new possibilities opened up by Covid-19 in higher education, as indicated by the students themselves. The following research questions are addressed: a. b. c. d. e.

What were the students’ challenges/difficulties with remote learning? What were the students’ opportunities in remote learning? Were the students satisfied with their remote learning? If so, how? Are there any differences related to gender, study level, or faculty? What helped the students to overcome challenges/difficulties?

To address these questions, the chapter is structured as follows. First, a literature review is presented, which is followed by the Methodology and the main results. At the end, there is a Discussion section before Conclusions are drawn.

2. Literature Review In recent decades, many HEIs around the world have offered online learning. However, before Covid-19, it is estimated that only 2% of HEIs (Bhagat & Kim, 2020) worked through distance learning, but since the pandemic began, it has become common practice for all HEIs. The International Association of Universities’ global survey on the impact of Covid-19 on higher education revealed that

Remote Learning During the Covid-19 Pandemic    69 HEIs around the world replaced face-to-face education with remote teaching and learning in an extremely short period of time. Global change, however, became a local challenge. A range of necessary solutions and support for stakeholders had to be implemented at short notice: access to technological infrastructure, technological competencies and pedagogies for remote learning, and the requirements of specific fields of study. At the same time, it must be emphasized that the benefits of remote learning were also quickly found: enforced by the emergency circumstances, more flexible teaching and learning approaches were evolving, and opportunities for mixing blended and hybrid learning, synchronous learning, and asynchronous learning were explored (Marinoni et al., 2020). The move to mass online learning in higher education impacted students in many different ways. First of all, there were challenges related to students’ equal access to education caused by the disruption to the education process and the digital divide, such as technological infrastructure issues, a lack of computers (O’Shea, Koshy, & Drane, 2021; Said-Hung, Garzón-Clemente, & Marcano, 2020), a weak internet connection or coverage (Adnan & Anwar, 2020; Händel et al., 2020; Lāma & Lāma, 2020; Marinoni et al., 2021; Mouchantaf, 2020; Nimante, 2021; Rahiem, 2020), as well as the need to adapt to new systems of learning/teaching (Demuyakor, 2020; Donitsa-Schmidt & Ramot, 2020; Treve, 2021; Wallace, Schuler, Kaulback, Hunt, & Baker, 2021). Students with limited or no access to resources and technologies and those with learning disabilities risked being left behind (Bhagat & Kim, 2020; Torres-Ruiz & Moreno, 2019). Digital inequality was identified during the Covid-19 pandemic in many aspects of remote learning: technological means, the autonomy of use, social support networks, and experience (Rahiem, 2020). An important additional problem in this context is the closure of HEI facilities and services, which impeded learners’ access to resources (Hoss, Ancina, & Kaspar, 2021). Secondly, students experienced challenges related to social isolation due to Covid-19 restrictions, which affected students’ well-being, nutrition, and exercise levels (Özden & Kiliç, 2021). One of the basic problems was identified as a general decrease or lack of social interaction and communication and a fear of less contact and interactions with and support from other students (El Masri & Sabzalieva, 2020; Hoss et al., 2021; Tufan, 2020), which raises the issue of yet another future threat: reduced student engagement and a diminished teacher– student relationship. As was explained by Oliveira, Teixeira, Torres, and Morais (2021, p. 1373), “The longer the pandemic lasts, the more likely the students will lose strong ties to the institution and to the community they are linked to.” As we know, membership of the learning community is accentuated as a vital factor in students’ learning experience, and it is hard for them to make their social presence noticeable in the online environment (Händel et al., 2020). The Covid-19 pandemic caused strong emotions in both adults and children (CDC, 2019). Due to social isolation and other restrictions, people could feel isolated and lonely, and stress and anxiety were increasing. It was reported that, in some cases, it caused “panic” and “anxiety” in students (La Velle, Newman, Montgomery, & Hyatt, 2020). The necessity to adapt rapidly to a virtual learning environment, social distancing measures, and socioeconomic uncertainties

70    Daiga Kalniņa et al. affected students’ mental health (Cao et al., 2020; Naidoo & Cartwright, 2020). A study conducted in Texas, USA, revealed that as many as 71% of students indicated increased stress and anxiety due to the Covid-19 outbreak (Son, Hegde, Smith, Wang, & Sasangohar, 2020). Research has also indicated that students had increased difficulties with concentration and sleeping patterns (Son et al., 2020) and worried about their health, family, friends, and future (Elmer, Mepham, Stadtfeld, & Capraro, 2020; Son et al., 2020). Students also showed high learning anxiety related to offline interactions on campus, learning motivations, and the shift in the learning mode (Arribathi et al., 2021; Longhurst et al., 2020). Even before the pandemic, various studies showed that healthcare students had a higher level of stress than other students. While learning remotely, this increased, and it was necessary to look for new and additional mechanisms to overcome this stress (Longhurst et al., 2020; Wallace et al., 2021). The challenges for prospective teachers in the face of remote learning experiences in schools have also been specifically explored (Donitsa-Schmidt & Ramot, 2020; Sepulveda-Escobar & Morrison, 2020). Student teachers see the remote learning experience as a positive contribution to their overall education. Although technology was used in education before the pandemic (Torres-Ruiz & Moreno, 2019), it was only in the period of remote learning that it became clear that prior levels of knowledge of technology were insufficient to survive remote learning (Donitsa-Schmidt & Ramot, 2020). So, the experiences gained from the pandemic need to be analyzed to determine which features of distance learning can also be used for remote learning (Daniela & Visvizi, 2022). Thirdly, students experienced challenges that were directly related to the online remote learning process and balancing digital with screen-free activities (Bryson & Andres, 2020). There were problems related to self-management and self-regulation: time management, self-organization, self-discipline, and problems with structuring everyday life, planning, and goal setting (Hoss et al., 2021; Lāma, 2021; Lāma & Lāma, 2020; Naidoo & Cartwright, 2020). Lāma (2021) indicated that the learning process during Covid-19 has been challenging for students and has created motivational and socializing problems. Students also experienced some physical difficulties with sitting around all day in front of the computer while learning (Nimante, 2021). From the research, it can be seen that both students and faculty members have identified weaknesses in the remote learning process: a lack of practical lessons, time constraints (creating new resources can involve at least three times more work than via the traditional format, at least initially), problems with accessing the lessons (Hoss et al., 2021; Longhurst et al., 2020), cheating during exams, and plagiarism (Novikov, 2020; Treve, 2021). Additional uncertainty was common; there were issues with connectivity, netiquette, and distractions in learning environments, as well as a shortage of high-level digital skills (O’Shea et al., 2021; Wallace et al., 2021). Fourth, the challenges included the enforcement and heavy workload of teaching and learning from home, specifically in the case of preservice teachers who worked while studying. These included matters related to gender inequality and the handling of double-paid work with unpaid care work. During the pandemic,

Remote Learning During the Covid-19 Pandemic    71 school closures combined with social distancing meant that academics and students with children had to balance online learning and research with childcare and homeschooling (Adedoyin & Soykan, 2020; Lei & So, 2021). It seems that most studies have concentrated more on the challenges that students experienced during their remote studies during the Covid-19 pandemic. This is probably connected with the same kind of “global trauma” that was experienced by the educational sector. Generally, the studies have shown a decrease in quality of life that negatively impacted students’ motivation and academic results (Longhurst et al., 2020). However, some studies looked for ways for students to cope with and overcome new challenges. As Son et al. (2020) revealed, students used both negative and positive strategies to overcome stress and anxiety. Examples of negative coping strategies were: ignoring the news about Covid-19, sleeping for longer, distracting themselves by doing other tasks, and drinking or smoking. Positive strategies were: meditation and breathing exercises, spiritual measures, keeping routines, positive reframing, physical exercise, enjoying streaming services and social media, playing with pets, journaling, listening to music, reading, and drawing. Some students sought help by talking to friends or study mates, while others looked for professional help (Nimante, 2021). The role of academic staff in those circumstances was important. Academic staff can significantly reduce stress by helping students develop effective coping strategies such as reflection or meditation by promoting collaboration among students and teaching staff, designing remote study processes in such a way as to facilitate student engagement and community building (Wallace et al., 2021). However, for some students, there were barriers to seeking help from official services, as they did not feel that their problems were being perceived as severe enough (Son et al., 2020). Students found it very helpful that some parts of the study routine remained the same – regular lectures, seminars, and a quality, well-organized digital study process carried on (Nimante, 2021), so students gained some feelings of security in that. The main strengths or positive effects of remote learning from a student perspective were as follows: saving time, increased flexibility in time and work management, gaining media- and study-related skills, upskilling in new technologies and resources, progress in digitalization in universities and society, increased flexibility in the (asynchronous) reception and processing of course materials, a better work-life balance due to remote learning, and the development of new online resources (Hoss et al., 2021; Longhurst et al., 2020). Academic collaboration and working remotely with the incorporation of blended learning in future curriculum development is recognized as a future opportunity. Other research shows that new technologies have provided innovative solutions for bringing practice-based knowledge and increasing learning experience, for example, the ability to work with people with different cultural backgrounds and enhancing continuous professional development (Patiar et al., 2021; Treve, 2021). Regarding the question about the satisfaction of students with remote learning, it is important to mention a quantitative study conducted in Asia which reveals that students’ satisfaction with online learning is influenced by teaching

72    Daiga Kalniņa et al. style. Students rated a few features of online learning remarkably higher than teachers – students perceived prominent superiority from online classes than teachers, evaluated educator performance higher than students’ learning performance, felt the quality of communication in an online environment was higher, and had a greater proclivity for online learning in the future (Lei & So, 2021). It is quite interesting that the students in other studies did not mention that switching to remote learning was somehow related to the health aspect, that is, the aim is to stop the spread of the virus and to ensure that the students stay healthy. So the students did not recognize remote learning as a health benefit but instead saw it as a problem, identifying more negative aspects. Students did not see it as an advantage and a benefit (Hoss et al., 2021; Oliveira et al., 2021). This may seem self-evident, but perhaps this initial basic aim of remote learning in the interests of public health was forgotten during considerations of all other opportunities and difficulties.

3. Methodology 3.1. Data Collection A 109-item questionnaire was developed by the authors and approved by the UL Study Department to explore the impact of Covid-19. The questionnaire was developed based on a review of the literature and on a follow-up study (Nimante, 2021). It consisted of three main question blocks: demographic questions; questions related to the organization of the study process in remote learning; and open-ended questions. In this chapter, we are going to analyze 82 items that are related to the research questions: 42 items about research question (a), 10 items about (b), 2 items about (c), 5 items about (d), and 23 items about (e). Students were asked to rate each question on a 5-point Likert scale, where 1 = Completely disagree; 2 = Mostly disagree; 3 = Can’t say/Not applicable; 4 = Mostly agree; and 5 = Completely agree. The questionnaire was uploaded to the QuestionPro survey platform and distributed in three ways: a link to the survey was sent to all student governments of all UL faculties, to all UL students listed in the UL information system with the help of the university’s administrative departments, and by a boosted Facebook post. All ethical research standards under the General Data Protection Regulation were implemented in the survey.

3.2. Participants This study used the principles of probability sampling, which is the easiest method for collecting data quickly and efficiently to provide an insight into how UL students broadly perceived the situation. The total number of students at UL was 15,260 in 2021, and 742 questionnaires were fully completed in Spring 2021 (within two weeks of May 8, 2021). Students from 13 faculties and from all study levels (from college (short cycle programs) up to doctoral level) were invited to voluntarily and anonymously express their views of the remote learning process at UL.

Remote Learning During the Covid-19 Pandemic    73 Table 1.  Number of Respondents by Faculty (%). Faculty

Total Responses to Questionnaire (%)

Faculty of Theology

0.67

Faculty of Biology

2.43

Faculty of History and Philosophy

2.56

Faculty of Chemistry

3.10

Faculty of Geography and Earth Sciences

3.37

Faculty of Computer Science

4.18

Faculty of Physics, Mathematics and Optometry

5.53

Faculty of Medicine

5.53

Faculty of Social Sciences

9.43

Faculty of Humanities

9.43

Faculty of Law

12.13

Faculty of Business, Management and Economics

12.94

Faculty of Education, Psychology and Art

28.71

The smallest number of students came from the Faculty of Theology, which is the smallest faculty at UL by the number of students. The highest number of respondents came from the Faculty of Education, Psychology and Art, which is the largest faculty at UL by the number of students (see Table 1). The majority of respondents were from the bachelor’s study level (see Table 2), while the smallest numbers came from doctoral and residency students. Overall, the respondents represent all 13 faculties and all study levels at UL. The sample generally matches the typical student distribution among faculties and study levels at UL.

Table 2.  Characteristics of Respondents by Study Level (%). Study Level

Total Responses to Questionnaire (%)

Bachelor level (ISCED 6)

66.98

Master’s level (ISCED 7)

19.49

First level (College) (ISCED 5)

6.77

Second professional level (ISCED 6–7)

4.06

Doctoral level (ISCED 8)

2.57

Residency (ISCED 7)

0.14

74    Daiga Kalniņa et al. Table 3.  Reliability Statistics. Cronbach’s Alpha

Number of Items

0.871

96

3.3. Reliability of the Survey Cronbach’s alpha was used to assess the internal consistency of the questionnaire, as the responses for all items were obtained from a Likert scale. Internal consistency is associated with the homogeneity of the items or the extent to which a construct is measured by a group of items (Henson, 2001). Table 3 shows that the internal consistency of the questionnaire is good (α = 0.871), and the survey is therefore reliable.

3.4. Data Analysis The study used a quantitative research design in which the researchers used a survey to explore the challenges and opportunities for UL students with regard to remote learning during the second wave of Covid-19 in Latvia (Spring 2021). To analyze the data, the survey responses were first downloaded into an IBM SPSS Statistics 28 software file for the reliability check. Cronbach’s alpha was used to test reliability. Secondly, a Kolmogorov–Smirnov test was conducted. This indicated that the results did not follow a normal distribution (p < 0.05). To answer research questions (a) What were the students’ challenges/difficulties with remote learning?, (b) What were the students’ opportunities in remote learning?, and (e) What helped the students to overcome challenges/difficulties?, descriptive statistical analyses were conducted on each survey item (frequencies), and internal statistics were employed (median and interquartile range). After that, Likert scale answers were combined: Completely agree and Mostly agree were combined as Agree, and Completely disagree and Mostly disagree were combined as Disagree. As a result, the answers were reduced to a 3-point Likert scale: Agree, Neither agree nor disagree, and Disagree. This helped to analyze the answers and understand the benefits students obtained from remote learning, challenges they had with remote learning, and methods that helped to overcome these challenges. Excel Professional Plus 2016 was used to create bar charts to display the breakdown of data into categories. To answer research questions (c) Were the students satisfied with their remote learning? If so, how? and (d) Are there any differences related to gender, study level, or faculty?, Spearman’s correlation analysis was used.

4. Main Results 4.1. Students’ Challenges With Remote Learning In answer to the question about the challenges students experienced with remote learning, the results indicate that the least challenging issues were so-called

Remote Learning During the Covid-19 Pandemic    75 infrastructural challenges, as most students disagreed with the statement that they have no access to the internet or technological equipment (Fig. 1).

I don't have an internet acces at home I have financial difficulties because my… I do not have sufficient digital skills for remote… I have financial difficulties because I have lost my job I don't have sufficient technological provision to… Health difficulties due to one or more cases of… There is limited communication with lecturers… I have sought help from specialists (psychologist,… I have poor internet connection at home I have difficulties getting to the training materials It is difficult to actively participate in class… Difficulty understanding tasks in online lessons Other health problems caused by prolonged tension… I haven't been able to create a new daily routine in… Concentration in studies is hindered by caring for… For me this type of study is not appropriate Feeling lonely I have difficulty completing and delivering jobs on… The fact that I have to turn on the camera does not… I have a harder time planning my time Difficulty organizing my learning activities at the… Communication with lecturers is difficult because it… It is not always possible to express myselve or… Difficult to grasp information in online lectures I have a broken previous daily routine I have hard time sticking to my schedule There is a lack of individual conversations with… I have lost my productivity Mental health issues (apathy, depression, long-term… It's hard to express your opinion so as not to disturb… Disappointment that there is remote learning, as I… It is not possible to practically test the acquired… Additional work load My stress levels have increased I procrastinate when working More work It is difficult to concentrate on studying online from… I am suppressed by unpredictability and the unknown It is difficult to motivate to study I am anxious Physical difficulties (long-term sitting, back pain, etc.) It's hard to keep my attention up during the online… 0.0 Agree

20.0 Disagree

Fig. 1.  Challenges With Remote Learning.

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

76    Daiga Kalniņa et al. The fewest respondents agreed that the challenging experiences they faced with remote learning are related to financial difficulties due to their own job loss (Mdn = 1, IQR = 0), their husband’s, wife’s, or parent’s job loss (Mdn = 1, IQR = 0), or Covid-19 illness (Mdn = 1, IQR = 0). Most of the respondents disagreed that they do not have sufficient digital skills for remote studies (Mdn = 1, IQR = 1). The students largely agreed with two statements about the difficulties they faced and agreed that the following are related to remote learning: It’s hard to keep my attention up during the online classes (agree N = 373, 51.8%; disagree N = 238, 42%; Mdn = 4, IQR = 3) and physical difficulties (long-term sitting, back pain, etc.) (agree N = 373, 51.6%; disagree N = 238, 43.2%; Mdn = 4, IQR = 2). Three more statements received the consent of the majority: I am anxious (agree N = 373, 48.2%; disagree N = 238, 34.2%; Mdn = 3, IQR = 4), It is difficult to be motivated to study (agree N = 373, 48.2%; disagree N = 238, 43.4%; Mdn = 3, IQR = 4), and I am suppressed by unpredictability and the unknown (agree N = 373, 47.3%; disagree N = 238, 43.8%; Mdn = 3, IQR = 3). Students had mixed opinions on the following statements: It is difficult to concentrate on studying online from home (agree N = 373, 46.5%; disagree N = 238, 47.5%; Mdn = 3, IQR = 2), More work (agree N = 373, 45.2%; disagree N = 238, 39.2%; Mdn = 3, IQR = 2), I procrastinate when working (agree N = 373, 43.9%; disagree N = 238, 50.3%; Mdn = 2, IQR = 3), My stress levels have increased (agree N = 373, 43.9%; disagree N = 238, 48.0%; Mdn = 3, IQR = 3), and Additional work load (agree N = 373, 43.1%; disagree N = 238, 39.7%; Mdn = 3, IQR = 3). It can be concluded that the students were quite united about factors that did not affect them during their period of remote learning, but factors that were challenging during the remote learning process are not common. This means that the remote learning experience during the Covid-19 pandemic can be considered very individual. No challenging factors were indicated by students that could relate to all students in the same way. Most probably, some individual factor combinations affected every single student.

4.2. Perceived Benefits of Remote Learning Answering the question of what benefits students see in remote learning (Fig. 2), we can conclude that the six most common answers were: No need to waste time traveling to university (Mdn = 5, IQR = 0); No need to spend money on transportation (Mdn = 5, IQR = 1); You can study from anywhere (Mdn = 4, IQR = 1); Opportunity to develop digital skills that will continue to be useful (Mdn = 4, IQR = 1); and I can save money because I can live at home/with my parents and/or outside the study place (Mdn = 5, IQR = 2). The main benefits are therefore connected with saving time and money and also the possibility to develop digital skills. Many respondents (N = 533, 57.2%) agreed or strongly agreed that the benefits of remote learning are related to saving time to do other

Remote Learning During the Covid-19 Pandemic    77 I have greater resistanceto stress Willpower is hardened It is possible to develop the ability to do several… Opportunity to combine caring for family (including… I can save money because I can live at home/with… More time is left for me to do what I want or for… Opportunity to develop digital skills that will… You can study from anywhere No need to spend money on transportation No need to waste time traveling to university 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 Agree

Disagree

Fig. 2.  Perceived Opportunities Associated With Remote Learning. things besides studying, but 20.1% (N = 160) disagreed or strongly disagreed: More time is left for me to do what I want or for myself (Mdn = 4, IQR = 2). Similar opinions were expressed for the statements It is possible to develop the ability to do several things at the same time (agree 51.4%; disagree 29.7%; Mdn = 4, IQR = 2) and Willpower is hardened (agree 51.1%; disagree 32.6%; Mdn = 4, IQR = 3). Opinion seems to be divided about the statement I have greater resistance to stress. Many respondents (N = 317, 41.7%) expressed their strong disagreement or disagreement, but a roughly equal number (N = 304, 43.5%) indicated that they agreed or strongly agreed with the statement (Mdn = 3, IQR = 2). It can be concluded that the majority of students see lots of benefits and opportunities from remote learning at a personal level. Almost all students agreed that remote learning helps to save time and money. It also provides students with more freedom on where to learn (location) and allows them to spend more time on other things in their lives. Many students saw remote learning as a good way to develop their digital skills.

4.3. Satisfaction With the Organization of Remote Learning The data shows that students are generally satisfied with the organization of remote learning at UL (Table 4). Spearman’s correlation analysis revealed a positive relationship between students’ age and their assessment of the organization of remote learning (Table 5) in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic at UL (rs = 0.740, p = 0.047). Students’ positive assessments increased with age. No correlations were found between students’ assessments of the organization of remote learning and students’ study form, study year, faculty, gender, or employment status.

78    Daiga Kalniņa et al. Table 4.  Students’ Assessment of the Organization of Remote Learning in the Context of the Covid-19 Pandemic. Frequency Valid

1

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

4

0.5

0.5

0.5

2

6

0.8

0.8

1.4

3

15

2.0

2.0

3.4

4

23

3.1

3.1

6.5

5

34

4.6

4.6

11.1

6

75

10.1

10.1

21.2

7

148

19.9

20.0

41.2

8

205

27.6

27.7

68.9

9

145

19.5

19.6

88.5

10

85

11.5

11.5

100.0

740

99.7

100.0

Total Missing

Percent

System

Total

2

0.3

742

100.0

1 = Very dissatisfied; 10 = Very satisfied.

4.4. What Helps to Overcome Challenges in the Study Process Students were also asked to identify what helped them to overcome challenges in the study process in the context of Covid-19 (Fig. 3). Most respondents indicated that they agreed with the following statements: Classes are held according to the lecture schedule (Mdn = 5, IQR = 1); Study materials are available in e-learning platforms (Mdn = 5, IQR = 1); The lecturers are responsive and welcoming (Mdn = 4, IQR = 1); The lecturers have good digital skills (Mdn = 4, IQR = 1); Successful e-communication with other students Table 5.  Correlation Between Students’ Age and Satisfaction With the Organization of Remote Learning at UL. Age Spearman’s Rho

*

How do you generally assess the organization of remote learning in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic at UL?

Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed).

Correlation coefficient

0.074*

Sig. (two-tailed)

0.047

N

724

Remote Learning During the Covid-19 Pandemic    79 Observance of internal normative documents… Successful e-communication with Faculty branch… Successful e-communication with the programme… Rules and requirements have been developed for… Successful e-communication with administrative… A certain routine Diversity of study forms (lecture, discussion, pair… The aim of the course and the results to be… Family support Timely feedback from the lecturer Accurate feedback from the lecturer on the… Successful e-communications with lecturers Course requirements are clear Selfcontrol and time management skills Independent works make sense The course mates are responsive and friendly The lecturers have good digital skills I have good digital skills Successful e-communication with other students The lecturers are responsive and welcoming There are precise deadlines for the tasks to be… Study materials are available in e-learning platforms Classes are held according to the lecture schedule 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 Agree

Disagree

Fig. 3.  Factors That Help Students to Overcome Covid-19-related Challenges in the Study Process. (Mdn = 4, IQR = 1); My coursemates are responsive and friendly (Mdn = 5, IQR = 1); and I have good digital skills (Mdn = 4, IQR = 1). Thus, we can say that some kind of stability and routine was important for the students in the study process. This probably ensured that the study process continued uninterrupted and thus that their study results could be achieved. The importance of support from their lecturers and coursemates was recognized as important, as was additional materials being provided on e-learning platforms (Moodle). There were no similarly polarized views on statements that helped to overcome challenges. We can also conclude that institutional factors like UL’s rules are less helpful than other factors.

5. Discussion Covid-19 irreversibly changed education throughout the world. Higher education will never again be the same as before. Covid-19 has become a new reality in society and all levels of education. Studies that have investigated challenges of the Covid-19 pandemic in HEIs analyze them from different perspectives: an institutional perspective (Longhurst et al., 2020; Marinoni, Land, & Jensen, 2020;

80    Daiga Kalniņa et al. Tufan, 2020), a student perspective (Hoss et al., 2021; Rahiem, 2020; SepulvedaEscobar & Morrison, 2020), and/or from the perspective of the academic staff (Mouchantaf, 2020; Oliveira et al., 2021). The current study aimed at investigating the challenges, benefits, and opportunities experienced by UL students during their remote learning. The study explored the following research questions: (a) What were the students’ challenges/difficulties with remote learning?; (b) What were the students’ opportunities in remote learning?; (c) Were students satisfied with their remote learning? If so, how?; (d) Are there any differences related to gender, study level, or faculty?; and (e) What helped the students to overcome challenges/difficulties? Overall, the current research results showed that remote learning has its advantages and disadvantages (Mouchantaf, 2020). It seems that students, in the short period since the beginning of Covid-19, found remote learning not only challenging but also beneficial (Marinoni et al., 2020) and saw some personal opportunities in it. In some way, our research results agree with those of Bhagat and Kim (2020), who anticipated that students would become more positive about online learning due to Covid-19. The study results reveal that students experienced several challenges. The majority agreed that most challenges refer to the physical and cognitive ability to engage in remote learning – they found it hard to keep their attention up during the online lessons, and there were also some physical difficulties (long-term sitting, back pain, etc.). The results are consistent with previous research conducted in Latvia (Nimante, 2021). Both environmental and social factors were also mentioned (disruption of education, being forced to adapt to new circumstances), and their well-being suffered due to the influence of social isolation, nutrition and exercise shortage, and the need for a learning community, as well as the education factors related to the online remote learning process and balancing digital with screen-free activities. These findings are similar to those from other studies conducted globally (Hoss et al., 2021; Lāma & Lāma, 2020; Naidoo & Cartwright, 2020; O’Shea et al., 2021; Wallace et al., 2021). The study found that the least challenging factors for students were related to so-called infrastructural challenges as most students disagreed with the statement that they do not have access to the internet or technological equipment. Students also disagreed that major challenges in remote learning are related to financial aspects. The results of the study are somewhat at odds with those of other researchers (Adnan & Anwar, 2020; Händel et al., 2022; Lāma & Lāma, 2020; Marinoni et al., 2020; Mouchantaf, 2020; O’Shea et al., 2021; Rahiem, 2020; Said-Hung et al., 2020), as the majority of students at UL did not believe that a lack of computers or a weak internet connection or coverage would be a challenge for them during remote learning. This contradiction could be related both to the context of Latvia and the fact that Latvia has good internet coverage (on average, 89% of the population have an internet connection; Kemp, 2021), so it seems that digital inequality is not an issue in UL’s case. Taking into consideration the fact that there has been a general increase in recent years in the employment of students in Latvia (2009–2017, during the semester, as many as 62% of college students, 50% of bachelor students, and 83%

Remote Learning During the Covid-19 Pandemic    81 of Master’s students had a paid job parallel to their studies), increasing from 45% to 61% (Koroleva, Trapenciere, Aleksandrovs, & Kaša, 2017), the researchers predicted that the financial factor would be indicated as the major one. However, our research shows that the respondents did not indicate this as a problem (which can be explained by the fact that the types of student work also allow them to work remotely or receive state downtime benefits, as well as opportunities to receive scholarships, etc.). It was interesting to learn that health issues caused by Covid-19 were not considered a challenge. Students also disagreed that they had some problems with digital skills, which coincides with previous research, according to which students perceive that they have sufficient digital skills (Lāma & Lāma, 2020). In answer to the question regarding the benefits of remote learning for students, the most highly appreciated were the possibility of saving time and money, gaining more freedom and thus increased flexibility in time and work management, the possibility to develop digital skills by upskilling in innovative technologies and resources, developing practice-based knowledge, and increasing learning experience and enhancing continuous professional development. These results coincide with the results presented by several studies globally (Hoss et al., 2021; Longhurst et al., 2020). In answer to the question “Were the students satisfied with their remote learning?,” we can conclude that there was overall satisfaction with the remote study process at UL. However, there were differences related to students’ ages. Students’ positive assessment of the quality of the remote learning organization increased with age. This could be explained by the fact that older students had more appreciation for the opportunity to balance work life and family life. For example, during the Covid-19 outbreak, students and teachers who were parents were occupied with childcare and homeschooling issues, which doubled their workload (Adedoyin & Soykan, 2020; Lei & So, 2021), so they found remote learning to be more satisfying. Following the emergency circumstances, it seems that Covid-19 has become a permanent issue for the entire education system. Therefore, it was important for our research to view both existing challenges and opportunities not only in the short run but also in the long term (Bhagat & Kim, 2020). In answer to the question of what helped students overcome the challenges of distance learning, we can conclude that the findings are generally consistent with other research. The promotion of social connectedness (timely identification of social support and activities that can foster students’ interpersonal relationships, increasing activity levels, and maintaining overall well-being given the social restrictions) and academic support (availability and quality of support to overcome academic difficulties) are important for overcoming difficulties (Salimi, Gere, Talley, & Irioogbe, 2021). It was added that the continuity of the study process and its implementation according to the set schedule of classes and lectures, thus creating a certain predictability and security for students, should not be underestimated. Remote learning was also seen by students as an opportunity to develop their digital competencies, and previous research has shown that the new remote learning situation required the acquisition of digital competencies at a much higher level, as well as the ability to use technology.

82    Daiga Kalniņa et al. Finally, we can add that experience of remote learning in pandemic circumstances, which are dynamic situations in and of themselves and which no one can be ready for, can be evaluated in several developmental phases: monitoring, preparing, acting, and new normalization (Tufan, 2020). The ability of universities to be innovative and to adapt to a rapidly changing external environment and challenges is now more relevant than ever in Latvia, Europe, and the world. The higher education sector is undergoing significant change and is part of a much broader shift in creating, disseminating, and using knowledge in society (Franco-Leal, Camelo-Ordaz, & Dianez-Gonzalez, 2020; Kunda, 2014). In times of transformation, when new social demands appear from unpredicted origins, such as the Covid-19 pandemic, educational processes face both sudden challenges and scope for opportunities. In such situations, educational innovation, which involves a constant and intentional alteration of visions and actions to improve the actors, components, structure, and management of education, can lead to the generation of new solutions (change, models, systems, and methods), and remote learning is one of these (Ramirez-Montoya, 2020). According to this challenging experience, researchers are calling for more focused, planned, and targeted preparations for future crises of transformation in higher education, where universities not only reconsider the existing health and safety standards but also address a wide-ranging set of critical issues around students’ well-being and health (physical and mental). It is expected that, in the future, institutions will increasingly learn adequate practices from other institutions, creating responsive learning experiences by supporting teachers, fostering open education, and developing open education resources for students to bridge the inequality gap (Baranova, Nīmante, Kalnina, & Olesika, 2021; Huang et al., 2020; O’Shea et al., 2021; Oliveira et al., 2021). However, they should not forget to include their students’ experiences as part of the student-centered process in this organizational development process and find new solutions for unexpected challenges through effective collaboration (Bryson & Andres, 2020; Dhawan, 2020). An analysis of studies in other countries shows that researchers have analyzed the impact of Covid-19 on the versatile experiences of remote learning, but few have offered solutions on how to overcome the difficulties. At the same time, these studies analyze global challenges in their early stages, although it is clear that this is the beginning of a new paradigm in higher education. Also, it has been pointed out (Visvizi, Daniela, & Chen, 2020) that remote learning shows its efficiency in micro-courses and in developing innovative teaching–learning methods. Taking into account the rising popularity of MOOC courses (Shah, 2020), further improvements in higher education are necessary to discuss the place of remote learning in HEIs in a normal, post-Covid-19 situation. Therefore, there is a clear need for longitudinal studies to examine the future developments of remote teaching and learning in higher education because the conditions of the pandemic pose a global challenge that can be overcome by developing researchbased solutions to be implemented according to the local context (Baranova et al., 2021; Marinoni et al., 2020; Oliveira et al., 2021).

Remote Learning During the Covid-19 Pandemic    83

6. Conclusions It can be concluded that students perceive that remote learning has its challenges, but also its benefits. Students can see the way to overcome those challenges with the necessary support. They are also united in their thoughts about factors that do not affect them during remote learning (technological access, internet coverage, financial factors, health issues due to Covid-19, and insufficient digital skills), but factors that challenge the remote learning process are not common. This means that the remote learning experience during the Covid-19 pandemic could be considered very individual. More than half of the students admitted that it is both physically and cognitively challenging to engage in remote learning – it was hard for them to keep their attention up during the online lessons, and there were also some physical difficulties (long-term sitting, back pain, etc.). No such challenging factors were indicated by students that could relate to all students in the same way. Students see lots of benefits and opportunities from remote learning at the personal level. Almost all students agreed that remote learning helps to save time and money. It also provides them with more freedom in where to learn (location) and allows them to spend more time on other things in their lives. Many students saw remote learning as a good way to develop their digital skills. Overall, UL students were satisfied with the organization of their remote learning, and students’ positive assessment of the quality of the remote learning organization increased with age. This could be explained by the increased need for older students to balance studies with their home life, especially during the pandemic. The greatest help for students in overcoming the difficulties of remote learning is to provide stability and routine in the study process, such as by ensuring the lectures were held as scheduled and the study process continuing uninterrupted, as the learning results can thus be achieved. The importance of support from lecturers and coursemates was also recognized as important, as well as the additional materials that were provided on e-learning platforms (Moodle). There were no similarly polarized views on statements that helped to overcome challenges. We can also conclude that institutional factors like UL’s rules are less helpful than other factors.

References Adedoyin, O. B., & Soykan, E. (2020, September 2). Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: The challenges and opportunities. Interactive Learning Environments. doi:10.10 80/10494820.2020.1813180 Adnan, M., & Anwar, K. (2020). Online learning amid the COVID-19 pandemic: Students’ perspectives. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology, 2(1), 2–8. https:// doi-org.datubazes.lanet.lv/10.33902/JPSP.2020261309 Arribathi, A. H., Suwarto, Rosyad, A. M., Budiarto, M., Supriyanti, D., & Mulyati (2021). An analysis of student learning anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic: A study

84    Daiga Kalniņa et al. in higher education. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 69(3), 192–205. doi:10.1080/07377363.2020.1847971 Baranova, S., Nīmante, D., Kalnina, D., & Olesika, A. (2021). Students’ perspective on remote on-line teaching and learning at the University of Latvia in the first and second COVID-19 period. In L. Daniela, A. Visvizi, & Z. Rubene (Eds.), Digital technologies for sustainable education. Special issue. Sustainability, 13(11), 11890. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111890 Bhagat, S., & Kim, D. J. (2020). Higher education amidst COVID-19: Challenges and silver lining. Information Systems Management, 37(4), 366–371. doi:10.1080/10580530.20 20.1824040 Bryson, J. R., & Andres, L. (2020). Covid-19 and rapid adoption and improvisation of online teaching: Curating resources for extensive versus intensive online learning experiences online learning experiences abstract. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 44(4), 608–623. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2020.1807478 Cao, W., Fang, Z., Hou, G., Han, M., Xu, X., Dong, J., & Zheng, J. (2020). The psychological impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on college students in China. Psychiatry Research, 287, 112934. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112934 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2019). Coping with stress. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/daily-life-coping/managing-stressanxiety.html#stressful Daniela, L., & Visvizi, A. (2022). Introduction. Remote learning as a mode of distance learning. In L. Daniela & A. Visvizi (Eds.), Remote learning in times of pandemic: Issues, implications and best practice (pp. 1–9). London: Routledge. Demuyakor, J. (2020). Coronavirus (COVID-19) and online learning in higher institutions of education: A survey of the perceptions of Ghanaian international students in China. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 10(3), 1–9. https://doi-org.dat ubazes.lanet.lv/https://doi.org/10.29333/ojcmt/828 Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational Technology, 49(1), 5–22. doi:10.1177/0047239520934018 Donitsa-Schmidt, S., & Ramot, R. (2020). Opportunities and challenges: Teacher education in Israel in the Covid-19 pandemic. Journal of Education for Teaching International Research and Pedagogy, 46(4), 586–595. https://doi-org.datubazes.lanet.lv/10.1080/ 02607476.2020.1799708 El Masri, A., & Sabzalieva, E. (2020). Dealing with disruption, rethinking recovery: Policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in higher education. Policy Design and Practice, 3(3), 312–333. doi:10.1080/25741292.2020.1813359 Elmer, T., Mepham, K., Stadtfeld, C., & Capraro, V. (2020). Students under lockdown: Comparisons of students’ social networks and mental health before and during the COVID-19 crisis in Switzerland. PLoS One, 15(7), e0236337. doi:10.1371/journal. pone.0236337 Franco-Leal, N., Camelo-Ordaz, C., & Dianez-Gonzalez, J. (2020). The role of social and institutional contexts in social innovations of Spanish academic spinoffs. Sustainability, 12(3), 906. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12030906 Händel, M., Stephan, M., Gläser-Zikuda M., Kopp, B., Bedenlier, S., & Ziegler, A. (2022). Digital readiness and its effects on higher education students’ socio-emotional perceptions in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 54(22), 267–280. doi:10.1080/15391523.2020.1846147 Henson, R. K. (2001). Methods, plainly speaking. Understanding internal consistency reliability estimates: A conceptual primer on coefficient alpha. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34, 177–189. Hoss, T., Ancina, A., & Kaspar, K. (2021). Forced remote learning during the COVID19 pandemic in Germany: A mixed-methods study on students’ positive and negative expectations. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 642616. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021. 642616

Remote Learning During the Covid-19 Pandemic    85 Huang, R., Tlili, A., Chang, T., Zhang, X., Nascimbeni, F., & Burgos, D. (2020). Disrupted classes, undisrupted learning during COVID-19 outbreak in China: Application of open educational practices and resources. Smart Learning Environments, 7(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-020-00125-8 Kemp, S. (2021). Digital 2021: Latvia. Retrieved from https://datareportal.com/reports/ digital-2021-latvia Koroleva, I., Trapenciere, I., Aleksandrovs, A., & Kaša, R. (2017). Studentu sociālie un ekonomiskie dzīves apstākļi Latvija 2017 [Social and economic living conditions of students in Latvia]. Retrieved from https://www.izm.gov.lv/lv/media/3943/download Kunda, I. (2014). Inovācijas universitātē: Varas un leģitimitātes aspekti. Promocijas darbs. Latvia: Latvijas Universitāte. La Velle, L., Newman, S., Montgomery, C., & Hyatt, D. (2020). Initial teacher education in England and the Covid-19 pandemic: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Education for Teaching. International Research and Pedagogy, 46(4), 596–608. Lāma, G. (2021). Self-directed learning in secondary education during remote study process. Case study in Latvia. In L. Daniela (Ed.), Humans, technologies and quality of education, 2021 = Cilvēks, tehnoloģijas un izglītības kvalitāte (pp. 309–320). Latvia: Latvijas Universitāte. Lāma, G., & Lāma, E. (2020). Remote study process during Covid-19: Application and selfevaluation of digital communication and collaboration skills. New Trends and Issues Proceedings on Humanities and Social Sciences, 7(3), 124–129. Lei, S., & So, I. A. (2021). Online teaching and learning experiences during the COVID-19 Pandemic – A comparison of teacher and student perceptions. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Education, 33(3), 148–162. Longhurst, G. J. Stone, D. M., Dulohery, K., Scully, D., Campbell, T., & Smith, C. F. (2020). Strength, weakness, opportunity, threat (SWOT) analysis of the adaptations to anatomical education in the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland in response to the covid-19 pandemic. Anatomical Sciences Education, 308, 298–308. https://doi-org.datubazes.lanet.lv/10.1002/ase.1967 Marinoni, G., Land, H. V. T., & Jensen, T. (2020). The impact of COVID-19 on higher education around the world. Retrieved from https://www.iau-aiu.net/IMG/pdf/iau_ covid19_and_he_survey_report_final_may_2020.pdf Mouchantaf, M. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic: Challenges faced and lessons learned regarding distance learning in Lebanese higher education institutions. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 10(10), 1259–1266. https://doi-org.datubazes.lanet.lv/ http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1010.11 Naidoo, P., & Cartwright, D. (2020, November 23). Where to from here? Contemplating the impact of COVID-19 on South African students and student counseling services in higher education. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy. doi:10.1080/87568225. 2020.1842279 Nimante, D. (2021). COVID-19 difficulties in the remote learning process and opportunities to overcome them: The perspective of future teachers. In L. Daniela (Ed.), Humans, technologies and quality of education, 2021 = Cilvēks, tehnoloģijas un izglītības kvalitāte (pp. 165–179). Latvia: Latvijas Universitāte. Novikov, P. (2020). Impact of COVID-19 emergency transition to on-line learning on international students’ perceptions of educational process at Russian university Philipp Novikov 1. Journal of Social Studies Education Research, 11(3), 270–302. O’Shea, S., Koshy, P., & Drane, C. (2021). The implications of COVID-19 for student equity in Australian higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 43(6), 576–591. doi:10.1080/1360080X.2021.1933305 Oliveira, G., Teixeira, J. G., Torres, A., & Morais, C. (2021). An exploratory study on the emergency remote education experience of higher education students and teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52, 1357–1376. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13112

86    Daiga Kalniņa et al. Özden, G., & Kiliç, S. P. (2021). The effect of social isolation during COVID-19 pandemic on nutrition and exercise behaviors of nursing students. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 60(6), 663–681. doi:10.1080/03670244.2021.1875456 Patiar, A., Kensbock, S., Benckendorff, P., Robinson, R., Richardson, S., Wang, Y., & Lee, A. (2021). Hospitality students’ acquisition of knowledge and skills through a virtual field trip experience. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Education, 33(1), 14–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2020.1726768 Rahiem, M. D. H. (2020). Technological barriers and challenges in the use of ICT during the COVID-19 emergency remote learning. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(11), 6124–6133. https://doi-org.datubazes.lanet.lv/10.13189/ujer.2020.082248 Ramirez-Montoya, M. S. (2020). Challenges for open education with educational innovation: A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 12(17), 7053. https://doi. org/10.3390/su12177053 Saeima. (1998). Izglītības likums [Law of education]. Retrieved from https://likumi.lv/ta/ id/50759-izglitibas-likums. Accessed on July 19, 2021. Saeima. (2020). Grozījumi Izglītības likumā [Amendments to the education law]. Retrieved from https://likumi.lv/ta/id/318794-grozijumi-izglitibas-likuma Said-Hung, E., Garzón-Clemente, R., & Marcano, B. (2020). Ibero-american higher education institutions facing COVID-19. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 31(1–4), 497–511. https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2020.1842835 Salimi, N., Gere, B., Talley, W., & Irioogbe, B. (2021). College students mental health challenges: Concerns and considerations in the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, Latest Articles, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/87568225. 2021.1890298 Sepulveda-Escobar, P., & Morrison, A. (2020). Online teaching placement during the COVID-19 pandemic in Chile: Challenges and opportunities Chile: Challenges and opportunities. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43(4), 587–607. https:// doi-org.datubazes.lanet.lv/10.1080/02619768.2020.1820981 Shah, D. (2020). By the numbers: MOOCs in 2020. Class Central. Retrieved from https:// www.classcentral.com/report/mooc-stats-2020/ Son, C., Hegde, S., Smith, A., Wang, X., & Sasangohar, F. (2020). Effects of COVID-19 on college students’ mental health in the United States: Interview survey study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(9), e21279. doi:10.2196/21279 Torres-Ruiz, M., & Moreno, M. (2019). Challenges and opportunities in the digital transformation of the higher education institutions: The case of Mexico. In A. Visvizi, M. D. Lytras, & A. Sarirete (Eds.), Management and administration of higher education institutions at times of change (pp. 137–149). Bingley: Emerald Publishing. Treve, M. (2021). What COVID-19 has introduced into education: Challenges facing higher education institutions (HEIs). Higher Education Pedagogies, 6(1), 212–227. doi:10.1080/23752696.2021.1951616 Tufan, Z. K. (2020). COVID-19 diaries of higher education during the shocking pandemic. Gazi Medical Journal, 31(2), 227–233. doi:10.12996/gmj.2020.61 UNESCO. (2021). COVID-19: Reopening and reimagining universities, survey on higher education through the UNESCO National Commissions. Retrieved from https:// unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000378174 Visvizi, A., Daniela, L., & Chen, Ch. W. (2020). Beyond the ICT- and sustainability hypes: A case for quality education. Computers in Human Behavior, 107, 106304. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106304 Wallace, S., Schuler, M. S., Kaulback, M., Hunt, K., & Baker, M. (2021). Nursing student experiences of remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nursing Forum, 56(3), 612–618. https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12568

Chapter 6

Life Career Skills Development in Higher Education Due to Covid-19: A Multivariate Approach to Students’ Perceptions Ioanna Papavassiliou-Alexiou, Christina Zourna, Nikos Koutsoupias and Aikaterini Papakota Abstract This chapter presents the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the course of studies and life career skills development of undergraduate students at the University of Macedonia, a mid-sized public Greek University. It describes a multivariate methodology research that investigated how the students, first-hand experienced the unexpected changes from face-to-face on campus to synchronous online education during the lockdown and how they coped with these changes. Change is considered and described as a main component within current life and career trajectories addressing chaotic and unpredictable circumstances while Chaos Theory of Careers (CTC) offers the theoretical background of the chapter. The research followed the mixed methods paradigm: a multilevel embedded sequential explanatory design including a participant selection model and multivariate data analysis methods. A survey (N = 621) was conducted; individual interviews and focus groups’ discussions further explained the quantitative findings. The emerging clusters of students revealed similarities in feelings, motivation, adaptation, and life career skills development. The first cluster comprised of older, digitally high-skilled students, with the required technological equipment, adaptable to change, self-regulated, strongly in favor of synchronous online education; in the second cluster were grouped the younger, digitally medium-skilled students, who regularly participated in both modalities, critically recognized the advantages of either one, feeling strongly in favor Moving Higher Education Beyond Covid-19: Innovative and Technology-Enhanced Approaches to Teaching and Learning, 87–107 Copyright © 2023 by Ioanna Papavassiliou-Alexiou, Christina Zourna, Nikos Koutsoupias and Aikaterini Papakota Published under exclusive licence by Emerald Publishing Limited doi:10.1108/978-1-80382-517-520231006

88    Ioanna Papavassiliou-Alexiou et al. of a combination; finally, the third cluster included digitally medium-skilled students who found serious difficulty in using online platforms, dissatisfied with social isolation and distant interaction, strongly preferring faceto-face instruction, valuing direct physical contact, social connection, and networking. Keywords: Higher education institutions; Covid-19; Chaos Theory of Careers; students’ careers; networking; Greece

1. Introduction: Covid-19 and its Impact on Education Worldwide The outbreak of Covid-19 affected most aspects of human activity. In March 2020 the entire world was in distress as a result of the pandemic threat; the challenging situation led to serious disruptions in academic activities and life career plans. School and university closures tended to increase pressure on students and instructors alike, especially those with limited digital skills and resources. Furthermore, they had various effects on students’ mental health; students faced new, complex challenges adapting to distance learning, isolation from peers, concerns about family, health, and financial security that led to loneliness and disconnection. The students were also stressed about their future career prospects as career plans and daily university routine forcefully changed (Agrawal, Sharma, & Singh, 2020; Bolumole, 2020; Cao et al., 2020; Naylor & Nyanjom, 2020; Onyema et al., 2020; UNESCO, 2020). Unable to deliver on-campus teaching, higher education institutions (HEIs) worldwide tried to provide academic continuity through emergency remote teaching. However, most universities were not prepared for the overnight switch to virtual learning amid a global pandemic. Emergency remote teaching mostly meant having basic tools in place, equipping faculties to teach online, and communicating changes to students on time (Crawford et al., 2020; Daniela & Visvizi, 2022; DeVaney, Shimshon, Rascoff, & Maggioncalda, 2020). From Asia to Europe, Africa, the Americas, and Australia, researchers’ response was immediate as they were interested in studying the impact of the pandemic on students’ well-being, the consequences of the university closures and emergency change to distance education as well as the unknown factors for re-opening the universities at a later stage (Johnson, Roberto, & Rauhaus, 2021). Nguyen and Balakrishnan (2020) in Australia, Ahlburg (2020) and Raaper and Brown (2020) in the UK, and Jacob, Abigeal, and Lydia (2020) in Nigeria found that financial hardships, severe workforce, budget cuts, and social isolation significantly affected the students’ mental health and course of studies and call for serious increases in government funding toward HEIs. Kapasia et al. (2020) also call for adequate funding and intense faculty training for skills development as they found that in West Bengal, India, students faced depression, anxiety, poor internet connectivity, unfavorable home environments, and social marginalization. Moreover, Alderman and Harjoto (2021) found that income inequality,

Life Career Skills Development in HE    89 unemployment, health insurance, gender and race “are related to cases, mortality, and recovery rates of COVID-19” (p. 640). In Vietnam, Pham and Ho (2020) observed that the Covid-19 pandemic brought about an opportunity to introduce e-learning into the country’s HEIs and, regardless of their personal attitude toward online education, both instructors and students embraced the changes and had “an enriched experience with e-learning” (p. 3). In Saudi Arabia, Abdulrahim and Mabrouk (2020) agree with the previous research claiming that the urgent digital transformation may offer a unique opportunity to enhance students’ learning outcomes and faculty skills, implement technical systems, and transform work environment conditions. Osina, Tolstopyatenko, and Malinovsky (2021) also found that in Russian University Law Schools the Covid-19 outbreak accelerated the age of digitalization. In various studies – such as Bao’s (2020) in China, Sobaih, Hasanein, and Elnasr (2020) in Egypt and Toquero’s (2020) in the Philippines – many strategies are suggested to facilitate transition to online learning such as adequate training courses, health and environmental hygiene practices integration. Rizun and Strzelecki (2020) in Poland and Azorín (2020) in Spain claim that the crisis highlighted the vulnerability of the educational systems and students’ low coping skills. Nevertheless, remote teaching seemed at the time as the only way to continue education; “an unavoidable alternative during Covid-19” (Naciri, Baba, & Achbani, 2020, p. 1); “a necessity in times of lockdowns and social distancing” (Ali, 2020, p. 16). Given the circumstances, all Greek HEIs also had to change under- and postgraduate courses from face-to-face to synchronous online settings, while the previously provided hybrid component was kept in use. For the University of Macedonia this transformation within the extremely short period of two weeks seemed at first as an impossible task. However, deadlines were successfully met and by the end of March, students were expected to participate in remote learning from any place they were confined due to the restriction measures. The above unexpected circumstances undoubtedly impacted the studies course as a significant phase in students’ career development. In the research described below, the students’ feelings, perceptions, and experiences of this chaotic situation and the changes caused to their ongoing life career skills development were examined in depth and interpreted by using a mixed methods research design. Organizational, psychological, teaching, and learning aspects were touched upon offering important innovative results which may well provoke further research on relevant topics. The chapter is structured as follows. The conceptual framework on chaos and change in students’ career development is followed by a coherent presentation of the multivariate methodological research design. The following section presents the main results gathered from various tools employed for the purpose of this study. Discussion and conclusions follow.

2. Chaos, Change, and Students’ Career Development Prior to the Covid-19 outbreak, the focus of discussion on education was about the need to ensure that young people’s current and future educational experience would prepare them for a series of “unknown unknowns,” characterized by

90    Ioanna Papavassiliou-Alexiou et al. the rise of Industry 4.0, environmental instability and possible social upheaval (Hughes, 2020, p. 8). Part of this world view was the idea that education in the twenty-first century should equip young people with skills and attitudes that are “future ready” so that they navigate change and complexity. The UN call for Sustainable Development Goals until 2030 (UNESCO, 2017) stresses furthermore the necessity of future-oriented skills development specifically in SDG – 4 Quality of Education, SDG8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth, and SDG11 – Sustainable Cities and Communities; on the other hand, researchers around the world have also started to question hitherto assumptions about quality education (Visvizi, Daniela, & Chen, 2020). Career development nowadays is a lifelong journey with non-linear routes. Back and forth movements, interaction between work, education and training, continuous changes, risks, improvisation, uncertainty, and insecurity are pieces of the modern career puzzle. According to the Definition of Career Guidance (Council of the European Union, 2008, p. 2), guidance and counseling services aim to support individuals to become competent managers of their choices and paths in the fields of education, training, and employment; this notion places students in the position of active players in the career field. The important transition from secondary to tertiary education, the beneficial use of their studies and – finally – the facilitation of an effective transition to the ever changing, demanding, and complex labor market are not only crucial goals of higher education (HE) career services but should also be embedded in every study syllabus (Börner et al., 2018; Ngang, Yunus, & Hashim, 2015). Academic discussion about skills and their relevant terminology has flourished in the last decade leading to the creation of various lists of skills, a detailed report of which is beyond the scope of this chapter. Key competences, career management skills, life career, horizontal/transversal/generic, and twenty-first century skills are only some basic terms with similar meaning used in the current field literature (European Commission, 2019; McComas, 2014; OECD, 2018; World Economic Forum (WEF), 2018). In order to become and remain employable through their life span tertiary education students mostly need to acquire and cultivate the appropriate mixture of life career skills as a central part of HE provision; an issue that is being internationally accepted and investigated (Andrews & Higson, 2008; Appleby, 2017; Bridgstock, 2009; Chan, 2010; Ehlers, 2019; Glassbeek, 2018; McRoy & Gibbs, 2009; Sa & Serpa, 2018). Within the above realities change forms one of the most common ingredients of nowadays individuals’ career development; as such, it offers suitable ground for the development of the twenty-first century career theory. Directly connected with chance, happenstance and unpredictable unexpected events, constant change has led to a gradual movement from traditional to more modern theoretical approaches to explain current life career courses (Athanasou & Perera, 2019; Patton & McMahon, 2014). The focus lies on the development of skills like readiness, proactivity, flexibility, networking, creativity, initiative taking, innovation, and problem-solving, which respond to current orders and circumstances (CEDEFOP, 2021; European Commission, 2019).

Life Career Skills Development in HE    91 The Chaos theory of careers (CTC) by R. Pryor and J. Bright, one of the latest developed widely known career approaches, focuses explicitly on change. More specifically, to explain modern life career as well as to develop methods and tools to support individuals’ career development, Pryor and Bright “play” with change, chance, complexity, and creativity as the four Cs’ central concepts of career management (Bright & Pryor, 2005; Bright, Pryor, Chan, & Rijanto, 2009; Pryor & Bright, 2003, 2008, 2011). How change has directly been bound to the career development especially of to-date students is explained by Bright (2013): Change is at the heart of CTC approach … What we need to do is to equip people … to be able to deal with the changes they are going to face, the unanticipated events that will occur in their lives … I think we are duty-bound to encourage students to embrace change, to understand change through “I even survive on change” … to think about change …. Continuing in this framework, Bright (2013) suggests specific ways – workshops, coaching sessions, and “educational events” – supporting students to become self-managers of changes and unpredictable effects in their career paths. Taking into consideration all the above, recording our undergraduate students’ experience of Covid-19 and the skills they used and/or developed to cope with unpredictable and unexpected changes brought into their life career, seemed an intriguing challenge.

3. Materials and Methodology This study followed the mixed methods paradigm: a multilevel embedded sequential explanatory design including a participant selection model which came in accordance with the results of the preceding multiple correspondence and hierarchical cluster analyses (HCA) (Benzécri, 1982; Creswell, 2014; Ivankova, Creswell, & Stick, 2006; Le Roux & Rouanet, 2010). A mixed methods design permits the investigation of phenomena involving change, challenge, uncertainty, and transition “from multiple viewpoints and through multiple sources and types of data and/or multiple approaches to analyse those data” (Bazeley, 2018, p. 7). When qualitative and quantitative approaches are implemented in consecutive research phases, they may complement each other allowing researchers to simultaneously answer confirmatory and exploratory questions as well as extend the scope and depth of understanding. Multiphase and multilevel designs are recommended for multifaceted complex problems regardless of the challenges they provide to researchers, even experienced ones (Almeida, 2018; Fielding, 2012; McKim, 2017; Pole, 2007). Although theoretically a mixed methods design could be both useful and effective, such kind of research offers multiple challenges as well; extensive data collection, time consuming data analyses, “the requirement to be familiar with both quantitative and qualitative forms of research” (Creswell, 2014, p. 267).

92    Ioanna Papavassiliou-Alexiou et al. Nevertheless, using the mixed methods strategy enhanced understanding of the situation and efficient dealing with the emerging challenges. Qualitative and quantitative research approaches were combined intending to “build on the strengths and neutralize the limitations of either methodology used alone” (Pole, 2007, p. 38). Unanimously made decisions straightened out formulating research questions, sampling procedures, data collection and analyses methods, conclusions, interpretations, and inferences “either variable or process oriented” (Bazeley, 2018, p. 9).

3.1. Utilizing the Mixed Methods Design The research comprised of four distinct phases; each of the first three informed the design and implementation of the consecutive ones. As Guetterman (2019) and Johnson, Grove, and Clarke (2019) claim, clear visual models of the complex design used in mixed methods research can facilitate understanding details and the flow of research activities in the design (Fig. 1). A pilot study facilitated the development of an appropriate survey instrument; thereafter followed a quantitative approach with embedded qualitative questions. The survey questionnaire comprised of 19 questions – 17 closed-ended at a 5-point Likert scale and two open-ended – as well as 10 socio-demographics questions. It was developed according to the recent literature about transition in studies (Grant, 2010; Tremblay, Lalancette, & Roseveare, 2012), impact on emotions (Baloran, 2020; Hopelab, 2020; Shenoy, Mahendher, & Vijay, 2020), and change in teaching and learning modalities (Blau et al., 2018; Yen, Lo, Lee, & Enriquez, 2018). As it was answered by 621 undergraduate students at the eight departments of our university, it rendered significant amounts of data needing further clarification. Therefore, after analyzing the data we purposefully selected students to participate in online individual interviews and focus groups discussions to further explain the findings of the quantitative phase (Casey & Krueger, 2000; Fox, Morris, & Rumsey, 2007; Krueger, 2002; Patton, 2002). The main interview questions were: (a) “How did you experience the change from face-to-face to synchronous online education?” corresponding to variables Q1–Q7 of the initial questionnaire; (b) “What was your perceived benefit from the online education?” corresponding to variables Q8–Q13; and (c) “How do you imagine the future of online education in HE?” corresponding to variables Q14–Q19. Through multivariate analysis methods all gathered data revealed hidden patterns involving demographics, level and quality of students’ participation in online education, preferences for course assessment methods, and level of satisfaction with the university’s response to the urgent situation. Finally, the emerging clusters of students revealed similarities in feelings, motivation, adaptation, career management and coping skills development, shedding more light into the impact of the unprecedented situation.

3.2. Sampling Sampling procedures and participants varied in the consecutive stages of the research. Forty students of Greek universities were selected through convenience

Life Career Skills Development in HE    93

Fig. 1.  Mixed Methods Design of the Present Research.

94    Ioanna Papavassiliou-Alexiou et al. sampling to be the questionnaire testers. After the forms were submitted, three online focus group discussions took place with six, eight, and 10 members, respectively, randomly selected from the 40 students. None of the 1st phase participants were included in the 2nd phase sample to avoid introducing “undue duplication of responses” (Creswell, 2014, p. 277). The 2nd phase quantitative target population were the active four-year undergraduate students in the eight university departments; 621 forms were completed. The participants (75% female, 25% male) aged 18–20 (48%), 21–23 (32%), and 24 or older (20%). About 34% of the sample were in the first year and 38% in the second or third year of studies; the rest 38% in fourth or higher. As for their digital skills, 63% were low skilled, 16% basic, 10% standard, and 11% advanced. They owned a personal computer (PC) at a rate of 83%, 14% had none, and 3% had to share. For the 3rd phase qualitative population, 63 respondents – 10% of the quantitative sample – were chosen according to Creswell’s Participant Selection Model stating that “the quantitative results typically inform the types of participants to be purposefully selected for the qualitative phase and the types of questions to be asked” (2014, p. 274). Afterwards, eight students to be interviewed – with code names P1–P8 – were purposefully selected among the 63 participants (Ivankova et al., 2006; Palinkas et al., 2015). In Table 1, one can see the variety of criteria these students met. It is worth noting that the validity of the informed choice of the interviewees was further strengthened as it came in accordance with the results of the HCA in the 2nd phase; two interviewees were found to belong to Cluster 1, three to Cluster 2, and another three to Cluster 3 as seen in the cluster plot of a twodimensional graph in Fig. 2 and explained in the Clustering section.

3.3. Data Analysis Methods As our mixed methods research yielded various types of results in the various stages (types I, II, and III in Fig. 1), multiple types of data analysis methods were also implemented. 3.3.1. Quantitative Data Analysis.  Quantitative data were analyzed through descriptive statistics (SPSS v. 21); some of these are presented in the Results section. 3.3.2. Qualitative Data Analysis.  Qualitative data gathered in the answers to the embedded open-ended questions of the survey questionnaire as well as in the verbatim transcribed interviews of the 3rd phase were analyzed. The constant comparative method of coding and theorizing of a Grounded Theory approach was selected as most appropriate to secure the greatest possible depth and breadth of the emerging codes and categories without imposing any previous theoretical assumptions on the data (Bryant & Charmaz, 2007; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). By following the procedure described by Auerbach and Silverstein (2003), 132 simple ideas were identified, grouped into 37 repeating ideas; these were then grouped into nine themes which led to three axes corresponding to the major interview questions. Tree diagrams of the last two stages of theorization were also designed to ensure cohesion of theoretical construct.

Yes

No

2nd

3rd

PC owner

Disability

Undergraduate degree

Year of studies

Preference of In favor of a teaching and combination learning modality of the two

Family

During confinement living (with…)

Strongly in favor of face to face

5th

1st

No

Yes

Room-mates

Basically skilled

Standard

Female

Digital skills

Female

Gender

23

No

>25

Age

P2

Working (parallel Yes to studying)

P1

Participants/ Characteristics

Strongly in favor of online

1st

1st

Yes

Yes

Family

Standard

Yes

Female

>25

P3

Strongly in favor of online

2nd

3rd

No

Yes

Family

Standard

Yes

Male

>25

P4

Strongly in favor of face to face

2nd

1st

No

No

Family

Highly skilled

No

Male

22

P5

Table 1.  Participants Selected Using the Maximal Variation Principle (Eight Students).

No

Female

21

P8

1st

1st

No

Yes

Family

3rd

1st

No

Yes

Family

Low skilled Low skilled

No

Female

18

P7

In favor of a Strongly in In favor of a combination favor of face combination of the two to face of the two

1st

2nd

Yes

Yes

Alone

Standard

No

Male

>25

P6

Life Career Skills Development in HE    95

96    Ioanna Papavassiliou-Alexiou et al.

Fig. 2.  Distribution of Qualitative Sample in Clustering. 3.3.3. Multivariate Correspondence Analysis.  Multivariate correspondence analysis (MCA) is a geometric data analysis method that delivers a vivid visualization of patterns in the examined data in the form of two-dimensional graphical factor maps of associations among the levels of row and column variables of a table “letting the data speak” (Benzécri, 1973, p. 18). Distances among row/column points are calculated based on chi-square, corresponding to Euclidean distances with adjustment for proportions in frequencies of individuals or categories of variables employing profiles (Benzécri,1982; Le Roux & Rouanet, 2010). 3.3.4. Hierarchical Cluster Analysis.  HCA groups all participants into clusters of distinct characteristics providing information on members in each cluster, and their vigorous and explanatory categories (Benzécri, 1973; Roux, 1985). This approach determines whether the ratio within the cluster level of each feature varies substantially – positively or negatively – from the entire sample. For conducting MCA and HCA analyses, R packages FactoMineR and factoextra within RStudio IDE were utilized (Gandrud, 2013; Kassambara, 2017; Lê, Josse, & Husson, 2008).

4. Results 4.1. Descriptive Statistics As the questionnaire covered a wide range of organizational, psychological, teaching, and learning aspects in HE, in this section we present only the variables

Life Career Skills Development in HE    97 that focus on the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the studies and life career skills development of our undergraduate students. Variable Q3 asked about the first moves the students made adapting to the new situation and how they managed the idea of forthcoming changes. A majority of 75.4% admitted having studied the information sent by the university sent, 24.8% searched the internet for help, and 31.6% asked their peers to explain the procedure. Note that the sum of percentages in some questions surpasses 100% because respondents could select more than one alternative answer. Variable Q4 asked about their participation consistency in online education. As high as 72.3% participated from the beginning without any problems, 18.4% participated from the beginning but eventually stopped, 6% chose to follow only some courses, while 3.3% did not participate in online education at all. In the open Q5, they provided reasons for their choice. Variable Q6 explored about the consistency of student adaptation to the newly defined conditions; 68.5% relied only on their own digital skills while 51.3% were supported by their course instructors. Few reported they were supported by family members or had previous experience of online education. Variables Q8 and Q9 referred to the students’ perceived advantages and disadvantages of synchronous online education, respectively. Regarding the pros, 74.7% chose easiness of participation from their personal space, 71.5% low time and money costs getting to class, 69.7% ease of use of online platforms and 43% increased student participation in class. Regarding the cons, 55.9% chose lack of physical contact with instructors and peers, 47.7% fewer group activities, 46.5% less non-verbal communication, and 39.9% less discussion/dialogue in class. Variable Q10 inquired the difficulties the students faced in online education. Findings showed that 54.1% found difficulty in concentrating, 44.8% had no stable internet connection, 30.8% were too anxious due to confinement, 39.1% lived in an overcrowded house, 16.9% had to share their computer, and 22.1% had no opportunity for deliberate isolation. Few students reported lack of motivation, disability, or health problems. Variable Q14 asked students about their preferred teaching and learning modality. Quantitative analysis showed that 40.6% chose face to face, 12.5% synchronous online and 46.9% a combination of the two. In the open question Q15, they provided reasons for their preference.

4.2. Interviews In the 3rd phase interviews as well as the answers in variables Q5 and Q15 were further examined. Quotes to support provided evidence were chosen from the eight interviews randomly coded as P1 to P8. All students admitted that during the synchronous online education they further developed their digital skills and obtained new ones by using various platforms and all kinds of different features; organizing, managing, and online presenting individual and group projects; searching and sharing information; leading online virtual meetings, interviews; and online chatting, solving quizzes, using technology. Time management skills ameliorated as they “organized time

98    Ioanna Papavassiliou-Alexiou et al. differently during the day” (P8); “changing classrooms in a second helped my following more courses than usual” (P2). Personal skills were developed; “patience” (P5), “self-motivation, self-stimulation, self-regulation” (P6), “staying flexible, informed, vigilant, predicting the future” (P7). Social skills were developed; “empathy for our instructors” (P5); “my peers and I organized an online chatting group, spent more time together than on campus, got to know each other more” (P8). Learning how to learn, taking responsibility for their own learning, motivating themselves were advantages provided mainly by older students. In their own words, “I was forced to manage things, but I learnt to enjoy it” (P1); “I have learnt to seek and find, not to expect others to do it for me” (P6); “I managed to cope; I feared delay of graduation” (P2). However, this was not the case for the younger students: “I feel like the whole semester is lost; I fear that I haven’t learnt a fraction of what I would have if education were provided face-to-face” (P5). Convenience, flexibility, accessibility, and inclusion were highlighted for both modalities: those in favor of face-to-face education said “no technical issues involved, no class interruptions” (P7); those in favor of online education said “not having to wake up for early morning classes was a real blessing; for a person with disabilities, getting to campus is a major everyday challenge” (P8). Students participated in high percentages in synchronous online education because they adapted easily to changing conditions, integrated innovation, managed to balance work and family duties with studies and took responsibility of their own learning. In their own words: “online education seemed at that moment the only possible way to continue our studies; why not take advantage of it?” (P1); “since online education started, I have not missed a single class” (P3); “I organized things better” (P6); and “I managed to make arrangements, participated in most classes” (P7). Some students faced the new situation as a challenge to be battled and won: “get informed, predict chances and grab opportunity: that’s all” (P4); “I believe that everything happens for a reason; I would not miss the opportunity” (P1); “I enjoy participating in what the university offers; Erasmus programs, conferences were postponed but I will definitely participate once the pandemic ends” (P5). The students who were not satisfied with synchronous online education mostly highlighted lack of motivation stimulus and lower quality instruction than the face-to-face, blaming their own learning style and organizational or technical issues. As they commented, “watching at a computer screen for many hours a day sitting on a chair was difficult” (P7); “staying inside four walls for a long time is not healthy” (P8); “impossible to communicate with peers or instructors; I felt isolated, distracted, abandoned” (P5); “in the beginning, everyone wanted to take part in the new thing but as the procedure continued, participation to some courses and quality lessened” (P8). As for the future the participants highlighted the need to build on the strengths of a combination of the two modalities; for the younger, keeping their autonomy away from family homes and socializing are as important as being able to participate in their studies regardless of financial status; for the older, it would allow participating in their studies without being restricted by work duties or family

Life Career Skills Development in HE    99 obligations or heavy schedules; for the students with disabilities it would mean “equity, fairness, and serious motivation in order to continue studying and lifelong learning” (P3).

4.3. Clustering MCA dimension output was employed with HCA producing three clusters of students (Fig. 2 in Sampling section) with similar characteristics (p < 0.05). Students of Cluster 1 (n = 131, top left section) have the following characteristics: male by a majority, older students aged 24 or more, not regularly participating in face-to-face education, digitally high-skilled, owned the required technological equipment; they were very much in favor of online education in which they participated daily and with enthusiasm. Students of Cluster 2 (n = 342, lower center section) have the following characteristics: aged 21–23, regularly participated in both teaching and learning modalities, digitally medium-skilled and familiar with the use of provided platforms. They had low-level negative feelings toward the changes taking place and were in favor of a combination of the two modalities. Students of Cluster 3 (n = 148, top right section) have the following characteristics: female by a majority, aged 19–24, regularly participated in face-to-face courses but less in online education, digitally medium-skilled, found serious difficulty in using online platforms. They had strong negative feelings toward the changes taking place; strongly dissatisfied with the quality of interaction in online education they strongly prefer face-to-face teaching and learning.

5. Discussion This study aimed at investigating the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the course of studies and life career skills of undergraduate students at the University of Macedonia. Rapid changes caused in HE provoked a multidimensional challenge for students all over the world but at the same time gave them an opportunity to further develop their skills; this also became obvious in this research. Our participants admitted that having to react to, understand and accept the compulsory and unexpected changes was a challenge, at least in the beginning. Most of them had to return to their homecoming places, stay confined in their overcrowded family homes, share equipment with siblings and/or working parents, face internet connectivity issues, suffer from multiple distractions, loss of autonomy, and self-organized living conditions (Fortune, Spielman, & Pangelinan, 2011; Lepp, Barkley, Karpinski, & Singh, 2019; Shu & Gu, 2018). Nevertheless, as the transition process evolved, the majority perceived it as an opportunity to use, grow, and further develop a series of life and career skills. Thus, they managed to confront difficulties, regulate emotions, get to know a lot of new devices and techniques, change living conditions, while at the same time they critically investigated both conditions, discerned the positive sides of each, took initiatives and the responsibility to design their studies, improve their skills, and extend their careers (Mulla, Osland-Paton, Rodriguez, Vazquez, & Kupesic Plavsic, 2020).

100    Ioanna Papavassiliou-Alexiou et al. Regarding students’ career development a worth noting demographic result came from interviews and HCA; it was primarily the older students who – from the very beginning – successfully managed change and transition compared to the younger ones. Following the principles of Super’s life span career development theory (1980) younger undergraduate students, that is, first year and in their first bachelor’s degree students, seem to be still too close to their over-protective, “pampering” Greek family and to the centralized, still teacher-centered Greek educational system; thus, they have not yet developed the necessary skills to cope with challenges during their studies. On the other hand, more experiences and roles in life, education and employment make older students more mature and skilled, thus more capable to cope with the unexpected changes in their life career (Akkermans, Paradniké, Van der Heijden, & De Vos, 2018; Blau & Kapanjie, 2016; Rossier, Ginevra, Bollmann, Nota, & Maree, 2017). Regarding skills’ development, students recognized that they further developed digital skills, namely one of the eight European Community Key-Competences (European Commission, 2019) and one of the most demanded skills groups in current labor market (Manyika et al., 2015). Learning to learn was another key competences domain clearly addressed by the participants; being forced/challenged to approach critically the change in teaching modalities, to comprehend and use new strategies and techniques, and to adjust effectively on synchronous online education, the students had the chance to reflect, experiment, and apply new ways of approaching and obtaining learning; a critical issue for HE, investigated in current studies (e.g., Behar-Horenstein & Niu, 2011; Kessler et al., 2020; Mullen, 2019; Perkins, Kelly, Dumbleton, & Whitfield, 2020; Sagitova, 2014; Wingate, 2007; Wright, 2017). In the same context, students noted that this period was fruitful in acquiring and developing personal and interpersonal skills such as selfregulation, innovation, flexibility, pro-activity, problem-solving, time and crisis management, building relationships in distance, cooperating effectively in new learning and teaching environments, and empathizing with peers and instructors (Bonnici, Maatta, Klose, Julien, & Bajjaly, 2014; Ebner & Gegenfurtner, 2019; Ertmer & Koehler, 2018; Kebritchi, Lipschuetz, & Santiague, 2017; Yen et al., 2018). Critical thinking was also enhanced during the lockdown period; many governmental decisions were questioned as individual liberties were curbed and trust in authorities’ efforts to battle the pandemic became smaller (Burns, 2020; Visvizi & Lytras, 2020). Concluding, as the combined quantitative and qualitative analyses showed, the majority of the participants managed to gradually regulate their emotions, overcome the initial difficulties, and finally embrace the chaotic changes of Covid-19 in their studies, making the best out of the new synchronous online modality; a process which agrees to the suggestions of current career theory (Patton & McMahon, 2014; Pryor & Bright, 2014).

6. Conclusions Prior to the Covid-19 outbreak, discussion on education focused primarily on equipping young people with “future-ready” skills and attitudes to navigate

Life Career Skills Development in HE    101 change and complexity. However, as the case of the Covid-19 pandemic showed, the urgency of the transition created unprecedented challenges; therefore, the lived experiences of students and instructors could prove to be valuable for further exploring the domain under new challenging circumstances (Bozkurt et al., 2020; Naylor & Nyanjom, 2020; Setyaningsih, 2020). By studying undergraduate students’ experiences of the changes enforced by the pandemic, we believe that this research contributes to the overall discussion on the matter and the decisions to be made concerning the future of synchronous online and distance education in the years to come. Moreover, participant clustering appears to be a promising method as it highlights the common characteristics shared by the members of each cluster identified through MCA and HCA in tandem analyses; these could lead policy-makers and various interested stakeholders to making informed and targeted decisions about immediate future interventions and suggestions.

Acknowledgments The research team would like to thank all the students who participated in the research as well as their colleagues at the University of Macedonia who supported the research by forwarding the survey questionnaire to their departments.

References Abdulrahim, H., & Mabrouk, F. (2020). COVID-19 and the digital transformation of Saudi higher education. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 291–306. Retrieved from https://asianjde.org/ojs/index.php/AsianJDE/article/view/468 Agrawal, S., Sharma, N., & Singh, M. (2020, June 16). Employing CBPR to understand the well-being of higher education students during Covid-19 lockdown in India. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=3628458 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ ssrn.3628458 Ahlburg, D. A. (2020). Covid-19 and UK universities. The Political Quarterly, 91(3), 649–654. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.12867 Akkermans, J., Paradniké, K., Van der Heijden, B., & De Vos, A. (2018). The best of both worlds: The role of career adaptability and career competencies in students’ wellbeing and performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1678. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2018.01678 Alderman, J., & Harjoto, M. (2021). COVID-19: US shelter-in-place orders and demographic characteristics linked to cases, mortality, and recovery rates. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 15(4), 627–644. doi:10.1108/TG-06-2020-0130 Ali, W. (2020). Online and remote learning in higher education institutes: A necessity in light of COVID-19 pandemic. Higher Education Studies, 10(3), 16–25. https:// doi.org/10.5539/hes.v10n3p16 Almeida, F. (2018). Strategies to perform a mixed methods study. European Journal of Education Studies, 5(1), 137–151. doi:10.5281/zenodo.1406214. Retrieved from www.oapub.org/edu Andrews, J., & Higson, H. (2008). Graduate employability, ‘soft skills’ versus ‘hard’ business knowledge: A European study. Higher Education in Europe, 33(4), 411–422. https://doi.org/10.1080/03797720802522627

102    Ioanna Papavassiliou-Alexiou et al. Appleby, D. C. (2017). The soft skills college students need to succeed now and in the future: Transferable skills for success in college and the workplace. Psychology Student Network. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/psn/2017/09/soft-skills Athanasou, J. A., & Perera, H. N. (Eds.). (2019). International handbook of career guidance (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer. Auerbach, C. F., & Silverstein, L. B. (2003). Qualitative data: An introduction to coding and analysis. New York, NY: New York University Press. Azorín, C. (2020). Beyond COVID-19 supernova. Is another education coming? Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 5(3/4), 381–390. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPCC05-2020-0019 Baloran, E. (2020). Knowledge, attitudes, anxiety, and coping strategies of students during COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Loss and Trauma, 25(8), 635–642. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/15325024.2020.1769300 Bao, W. (2020). COVID-19 and online teaching in higher education: A case study of Peking University. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2(2), 113–115. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/hbe2.191 Bazeley, P. (2018). Integrating analyses in mixed methods research (1st ed.). London: SAGE Publications. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781526417190 Behar-Horenstein, L. S., & Niu, L. (2011). Teaching critical thinking skills in higher education: A review of the literature. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 8(2), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.19030/tlc.v8i2.3554 Benzécri, J. P. (1973). L’Analyse des Données. Tome 1: La taxinomie. Tome 2: L’ Analyse des Correspondances. Dunod. Benzécri, J. P. (1982). Histoire et Préhistoire de l’ Analyse des Données. Dunod. Blau, G., Jarrell, S., Seeton, A., Young, T., Grace, K., & Hughes, M. (2018). Proposing an expanded measure for comparing online/hybrid to face-to-face courses. Journal of Education and Development, 2(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.20849/jed.v2i2.400 Blau, G., & Kapanjie, D. (2016). Correlates of business undergraduates’ perceived favorability of online compared to face-to-face courses. Journal of Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness, 6(1), 50–66. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/ stable/10.5325/jasseinsteffe.6.1.0050 Bolumole, M. (2020). Student life in the age of COVID-19. Higher Education Research & Development, 39(7), 1357–1361. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1825345 Bonnici, L. J., Maatta, S. L., Klose, M. K., Julien, H., & Bajjaly, S. (2014). Instructional style and learner-centered approach: A cross-institutional examination of modality preference for online course delivery in a graduate professional program. Studies in Higher Education, 41(8), 1389–1407. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.977860 Börner, K., Scrivner, O., Gallant, M., Ma, S., Liu, X., Chewning, K., … Evans, J. A. (2018). Skill discrepancies between research, education, and jobs reveal the critical need to supply soft skills for the data economy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(50), 12630–12637. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1804247115 Bozkurt, A., Jung, I., Xiao, J., Vladimirschi, V., Schuwer, R., Egorov, G., …, 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. Retrieved from http://asianjde.org/ojs/index.php/AsianJDE/ article/view/462 Bridgstock, R. (2009). The graduate attributes we’ve overlooked: Enhancing graduate employability through career management skills. Higher Education Research & Development, 28(1), 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360802444347 Bright, J. E. H. (2013, November 4). Chaos Theory of Careers explained – Interview at Vanderbilt University [Video file]. YouTube. Retrieved from https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=BL2wTkgBEyk

Life Career Skills Development in HE    103 Bright, J. E. H., & Pryor, R. G. L. (2005). The chaos theory of careers: A users’ guide. The Career Development Quarterly, 53, 291–305. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2005. tb00660.x Bright, J. E. H., Pryor, R. G. L., Chan, E. W. M., & Rijanto, J. (2009). Chance events in career development: Influence, control and multiplicity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 75, 14–25. Retrieved from https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/j.jvb.2009.02.007 Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K. (2007). Grounded theory in historical perspective: An epistemological account. In A. Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of grounded theory (pp. 31–57). London: SAGE Publications. Burns, R. (2020). A COVID-19 panacea in digital technologies? Challenges for democracy and higher education. Dialogues in Human Geography, 10(2), 246–249. https://doi.org/ 10.1177%2F2043820620930832 Cao, W., Fang, Z., Hou, G., Han, M., Xu, X., … Zheng, J. (2020). The psychological impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on college students in China. Psychiatry Research, 287, 112934. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.psychres.2020.112934 Casey, M. A., & Krueger, R. A. (2000). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (3rd ed.). London: SAGE/CEDEFOP (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2021). Career guidance policy and practice in the pandemic: Results of a joint international survey June to August 2020. Publications Office. Retrieved from https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2801/318103). Chan, W. (2010). Students’ understanding of generic skills development in a university in Hong Kong. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 4815–4819. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.776 CEDEFOP (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2021). Career guidance policy and practice in the pandemic: Results of a joint international survey June to August 2020. Publications Office. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2801/318103 Council of the European Union. (2008). Council Resolution on better integrating lifelong guidance into lifelong learning strategies. Retrieved from https://www.consilium. europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/educ/104236.pdf Crawford, J., Butler-Henderson, K., Rudolph, J., Malkawi, B., Glowatz, M., Burton, R., … Lam, S. (2020). COVID-19: 20 Countries’ higher education intra-period digital pedagogy responses. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 3(1), 1–20. https:// doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2020.3.1.7 Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). London: SAGE Publications. Daniela, L., & Visvizi, A. (Eds.). (2022). Remote learning in times of pandemic. London: Routledge. DeVaney, J., Shimshon, G. Rascoff, M., & Maggioncalda, J. (2020). How can universities adapt during COVID-19? A guide for universities to build and scale online learning programs. Retrieved from https://www.timeshighereducation.com/sites/default/files/ how-can-universities-adapt-covid19_whitepaper.pdf. Accessed on August 10, 2020. Ebner, C., & Gegenfurtner, A. (2019). Learning and satisfaction in webinar, online, and faceto-face instruction: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Education, 4, 1–11. https://doi.org/ 10.3389/feduc.2019.00092 Ehlers, U. D. (2019, March 18). Future skills and the future of higher education. Paper presentation on the ICDE world conference on online learning, Dublin. Ertmer, P. A., & Koehler, A. A. (2018). Facilitation strategies and problem space coverage: Comparing face-to-face and online case-based discussions. Educational Technology and Research, 66, 639–670. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9563-9 European Commission. (2019). Key competences for lifelong learning. DirectorateGeneral for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture. Publications Office. Retrieved from https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/291008

104    Ioanna Papavassiliou-Alexiou et al. Fielding, N. G. (2012). Triangulation and mixed methods designs: Data integration with new research technologies. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(2), 124–136. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1558689812437101 Fortune, M. F., Spielman, M., & Pangelinan, D. T. (2011). Students’ perceptions of online or face-to-face learning and social media in hospitality, recreation and tourism. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(1), 1–16. Retrieved from https://jolt. merlot.org/vol7no1/fortune_0311.pdf Fox, F. E., Morris, M., & Rumsey, N. (2007). Doing synchronous online focus groups with young people: Methodological reflections. Qualitative Health Research, 17(4), 539–547. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1049732306298754 Gandrud, C. (2013). Reproducible research with R and R Studio. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Glassbeek, S. (2018). The importance of transversal skills and competences for young people in a modern Europe. Policy Paper. Youth Development Working Group of AEGEE Europe (Association des Etats Généraux des Etudiants de l’Europe/ European Students’ Forum). Retrieved from https://www.aegee.org/policy-paperthe-importance-of-transversal-skills-and-competences-for-young-people-in-a-moderneurope/ Grant, A. M. (2010). It takes time: A stages of change perspective on the adoption of workplace coaching skills. Journal of Change Management, 10(1), 61–77. https:// doi.org/10.1080/14697010903549440 Guetterman, T. C. (2019). International institute for qualitative methodology (IIQM) Timothy Gutterman presenting on August 27, 2019 on behalf of IIQM and MMIRA video. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6KvCN-7ZKM Hopelab. (2020). Combating loneliness and isolation in College students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Retrieved from https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ combating-loneliness-and-isolation-in-college-students-during-the-covid-19pandemic-301036557.html. Accessed on July 27, 2020. Hughes, C. (2020). Some implications of COVID-19 for remote learning and the future of schooling. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000373229. Accessed on 27 July, 2020. Ivankova, N. V., Creswell, J. W., & Stick, S. L. (2006). Using mixed-methods sequential explanatory design: From theory to practice. Field Methods, 18(1), 3–20. https:// doi.org/10.1177%2F1525822X05282260 Jacob, O. N., Abigeal, I., & Lydia, A. E. (2020). Impact of COVID-19 on the higher institutions development in Nigeria. Electronic Research Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2(2), 126–135. Retrieved from http://www.eresearchjournal.com/ Johnson, A. F., Roberto, K. J., & Rauhaus, B. M. (2021). Policies, politics and pandemics: Course delivery method for US higher educational institutions amid COVID-19. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 15(2), 291–303. doi:10.1108/ TG-07-2020-0158 Johnson, R. E., Grove, A. L., & Clarke, A. (2019). Pillar integration process: A joint display technique to integrate data in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(3), 301–320. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1558689817743108 Kapasia, N., Paul, P., Roy, A., Saha, J., Zaveri, A., Mallick, R., … Chouhan, P. (2020). Impact of lockdown on learning status of undergraduate and postgraduate students during COVID-19 pandemic in West Bengal, India. Children and Youth Services Review, 116, 1–25. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.childyouth.2020.105194 Kassambara, A. (2017). Practical guide to principal component methods in R: PCA, M (CA), FAMD, MFA, HCPC, factoextra (Vol. 2). STHDA. Kebritchi, M., Lipschuetz, A., & Santiague, L. (2017). Issues and challenges for teaching successful online courses in higher education: A literature review. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 46(1), 4–29. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0047239516661713

Life Career Skills Development in HE    105 Kessler, A., Barnes, S., Rajagopal, K., Rankin, J., Pouchak, L., Silis, M., & Esser, W. (2020). Saving a semester of learning: MIT’s emergency transition to online instruction. Information and Learning Sciences, 121(7/8), 587–597. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-042020-0097 Krueger, R. A. (2002). Designing and conducting focus groups interviews. Semantic Scholar. Le Roux, B., & Rouanet, H. (2010). Multiple correspondence analysis (Vol. 163). London: SAGE Publications. Lê, S., Josse, J., & Husson, F. (2008). FactoMineR: An R package for multivariate analysis. Journal of Statistical Software, 25(1), 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.18637/jss.v025.i01 Lepp, A., Barkley, J. E., Karpinski, A. C., & Singh, S. (2019). College students’ multitasking behavior in online versus face-to-face courses. SAGE Open, 9(1). https://doi.org/ 10.1177%2F2158244018824505 Manyika, J., Chui, M., Bisson, P., Woetzel, J., Dobbs, R., Bughin, J., & Aharon, D. (2015). “Unlocking the potential of the Internet of Things.” Report. McKinsey Global Institute. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/mckinseydigital/our-insights/the-internet-of-things-the-value-of-digitizing-the-physical-world McComas, W. F. (2014). 21st-Century skills. In W. F. McComas (Ed.), The language of science education. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-497-0_1 McKim, C. (2017). The value of mixed methods research: A mixed methods study. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 11(2), 202–222. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F 1558689815607096 McRoy, I., & Gibbs, P. (2009). Leading change in higher education. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 37(5), 687–704. https://doi.org/10.1177 %2F1741143209339655 Mulla, Z. D., Osland-Paton, V., Rodriguez, M. A., Vazquez, E., & Kupesic Plavsic, S. (2020). Novel Coronavirus, novel faculty development programs: Rapid transition to e-Learning during the pandemic. Journal of Perinatal Medicine, 48(5), 446–449. https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2020-0197 Mullen, C. A. (2019). Does modality matter? A comparison of aspiring leaders’ learning online and face-to-face. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 44(5), 670–688. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2019.1576859 Naciri, A., Baba, M. A., & Achbani, A. (2020). Mobile learning in higher education: Unavoidable alternative during COVID-19. Aquademia, 4(1), ep20016. https:// doi.org/10.29333/aquademia/8227 Naylor, D., & Nyanjom, J. (2020). Educators’ emotions involved in the transition to online teaching in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 40(6), 1236–1250. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1811645 Ngang, T. K., Yunus, H. M., & Hashim, N. H. (2015). Soft skills integration in teaching professional training: Novice teachers’ perspectives. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 186, 835–840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.204 Nguyen, O. T. K., & Balakrishnan, V. D. (2020). International students in Australia – During and after COVID-19. Higher Education Research & Development, 39(7), 1372–1376. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1825346 OECD. (2018). “The future of education and skills. Education 2030”. Position paper. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/education/2030/E2030%20Position%20Paper%20 (05.04.2018).pdf Onyema, E. M., Eucheria, N. C., Obafemi, F. A., Sen, S., Atonye, F. G., Sharma, A., & Alsayed, A. O. (2020). Impact of Coronavirus pandemic on education. Journal of Education and Practice, 11(13). doi:10.7176/JEP/11-13-12 Osina, D. M., Tolstopyatenko, G. P., & Malinovsky, A. A. (2021). Digitalization of higher legal education in Russia in the Age of Covid-19. In S. Ashmarina, V. Mantulenko, & M. Vochozka (Eds.), Engineering economics: Decisions and solutions from Eurasian

106    Ioanna Papavassiliou-Alexiou et al. perspective. Engineering Economics Week 2020. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems (Vol. 139, pp. 392–398). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53277-2_47 Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health Services Research, 42, 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.). London: SAGE Publications. Patton, W., & McMahon, M. (2014). Career development and systems theory: Connecting theory to practice (3rd ed.). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Perkins, A., Kelly, S., Dumbleton, H., & Whitfield, S. (2020). Pandemic pupils: COVID-19 and the impact on student paramedics. Australasian Journal of Paramedicine, 17(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.33151/ajp.17.811 Pham, H.-H., & Ho, T.-T.-H. (2020). Toward a ‘new normal’ with e learning in Vietnamese higher education during the post COVID-19 pandemic. Higher Education Research & Development, 39(7), 1327–1331. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1823945 Pole, K. (2007). Mixed methods designs: A review of strategies for blending quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 20(4), 35–38. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ808947 Pryor, R., & Bright, J. (2011). The Chaos theory of careers: A new perspective on working in the twenty-first century. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203871461 Pryor, R. G. L., & Bright, J. E. H. (2003). The chaos theory of careers. Australian Journal of Career Development, 12, 12–20. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F103841620301200304 Pryor, R. G. L., & Bright, J. E. H. (2008). Archetypal narratives in career counselling: A chaos theory application. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 8, 71–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10775-008-9138-8 Pryor, R. G., & Bright, J. E. (2014). The Chaos theory of careers (CTC): Ten years on and only just begun. Australian Journal of Career Development, 23(1), 4–12. https:// doi.org/10.1177%2F1038416213518506 Raaper, R., & Brown, C. (2020). The Covid-19 pandemic and the dissolution of the university campus: Implications for student support practice. Journal of Professional Capital and Community. No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPCC-06-2020-0032 Rizun, M., & Strzelecki, A. (2020). Students’ acceptance of the COVID-19 impact on shifting higher education to distance learning in Poland. International Journal of Environmental Research & Public Health, 17, 6468. https://doi.org/10.3390/ ijerph171866468 Rossier, J., Ginevra, M. C., Bollmann, G., Nota, L., & Maree, K. (2017). The importance of career adaptability, career resilience, and employability in designing a successful life. In K. Maree (Ed.), Psychology of career adaptability, employability and resilience (pp. 65–82). New York, NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66954-0 Roux, M. (1985). Algorithmes de classification. New York, NY: Masson. Sa, M. J., & Serpa, S. (2018). Transversal competences: Their importance and learning processes by higher education students. Education Sciences, 8(3), 126. https://doi. org/10.3390/educsci8030126 Sagitova, R. (2014). Students’ self-education: Learning to learn across the lifespan. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 152, 272–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.sbspro.2014.09.194 Setyaningsih, E. (2020). Face-to-face or online learning: Students’ perspectives on blended learning in Indonesia. Journal of English Language Studies, 5(1), 1–14. Retrieved from http://jurnal.untirta.ac.id/index.php/JELS Shenoy, V., Mahendher, S., & Vijay, N. (2020, April). COVID 19 lockdown technology adaption, teaching, learning, students engagement and faculty experience. Mukt Shabd Journal, IX(IV), 698–702.

Life Career Skills Development in HE    107 Shoo, H., & Gu, X. (2018). Determining the differences between online and face-to-face student-group interactions in a blended learning course. The Internet and Higher Education, 39, 13–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2018.05.003 Sobaih, A. E. E., Hasanein, A. M., & Elnasr, A. E. A. (2020). Responses to COVID-19 in higher education: Social media usage for sustaining formal academic communication in developing countries. Sustainability, 12, 6520. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su12166520 Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: SAGE Publications. Super, D. E. (1980). A life-span, life-space approach to career development. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 16(3), 282–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(80)90056-1 Toquero, C. M. (2020). Challenges and opportunities for higher education amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Philippine context. Pedagogical Research, 5(4), em0063. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/7947 Tremblay, K., Lalancette, D., & Roseveare, D. (2012). Assessment of higher education learning outcomes. Paris: OECD. UNESCO. (2017). UNESCO moving forward the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Retrieved from https://en.unesco.org/creativity/sites/creativity/files/247785en. pdf UNESCO. (2020). Impact of Coronavirus pandemic on education adverse consequences of school closures. Retrieved from https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse/ consequences Visvizi, A., Daniela, L., & Chen, C. W. (2020). Beyond the ICT- and sustainability hypes: A case for quality education. Computers in Human Behavior, 107, 1–3. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.chb.2020.106304 Visvizi, A., & Lytras, M. (2020). Covid-19 transforms the government: Here’s what to look at. Editorial. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 14(2), 125–131. doi:10.1108/TG-05-2020-128 Wingate, U. (2007). A framework of transition: Supporting ‘learning to learn’ in higher education. Higher Education Quarterly, 61(3), 391–405. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1468-2273.2007.00361.x World Economic Forum (WEF). (2018). Towards a reskilling revolution: A future of jobs for all. Insight Report. WEF, Cologny. Wright, B. M. (2017). Blended learning: Student perception of face-to-face and online EFL lessons. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7(1), 64–71. https://doi.org/ 10.17509/ijal.v7i1.6859 Yen, S.-C., Lo, Y., Lee, A., & Enriquez, J.-M. (2018). Learning online, offline, and in-between: Comparing student academic outcomes and course satisfaction in face-to-face, online, and blended teaching modalities. Education and Information Technologies, 23(5), 2141–2153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9707-5

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 7

Rethinking Action Learning During the Covid-19 Pandemic: Highlights from the Italian Context Francesca Loia and Davide de Gennaro Abstract Over the past years, the educational environment has undergone a revolution, caused mainly by the wide diffusion of information and communication technologies (ICTs), and the multiscalar implications of the Covid-19 pandemic. This chapter taps into educators’ first-hand experience relating to the adoption of online technologies in an action learning process during the pandemic. Action learning is one of the experiential training methodologies aimed at individual, group, and organizational growth and development through practical, hands-on experience. It is an educational process that facilitates and improves the mechanism and functioning of groups of people who come together to support real challenges or activities, also by learning from direct experience. To this end, the case study of a University Master Course in leadership and change management is examined, based on unstructured interviews and analysis of written documents. The case study represents an emblematic case of adaptation and response to the change imposed by Covid-19 through the promotion of an innovative teaching and learning method. Results show how the adjustments devised to cope with the consequence of teamwork virtualization proved to be synergistic, delivering positive outcomes in terms of participants satisfaction, learning and impact, and producing deeply innovative change management projects. Implications for theory and practice are discussed. Keywords: E-learning; action learning; Covid-19; case study; Italy; HEIs

Moving Higher Education Beyond Covid-19: Innovative and Technology-Enhanced Approaches to Teaching and Learning, 109–125 Copyright © 2023 by Francesca Loia and Davide de Gennaro Published under exclusive licence by Emerald Publishing Limited doi:10.1108/978-1-80382-517-520231007

110    Francesca Loia and Davide de Gennaro

1. Introduction Nowadays, the educational environment has undergone a revolution, mainly caused by the wide diffusion of ICT (Daniela & Visvizi, 2022; Daniela, Visvizi, Gutiérrez-Braojos, & Lytras, 2018; Visvizi & Daniela, 2019; Visvizi, Lytras, & Daniela, 2018). In recent years, there was already high growth and adoption in education technology, with global education technology (edtech) investments reaching US$18.66 billion in 2019 and the overall market for online education projected to reach $350 billion by 2025 (World Economic Forum, 2020); nevertheless, there has been a significant surge in edtech usage since Covid-19. The pandemic context has seriously affected the education system worldwide (e.g., Onyema et al., 2020; Toquero, 2020). As a consequence, the e-learning approach has been suddenly implemented to face the dramatic pandemic challenge (Abumalloh et al., 2021; Pokhrel & Chhetri, 2021). Research and assessments have been carried out on the virtualization of frontal instruction, but little attention has been paid to innovative learner-centered methods, such as action learning. Action learning is an experience-based learning strategy through which participants learn from and with others (Smith, 2001). Participants are asked to work on concrete projects, with a codified learning environment structured in meetings, individual, small group, and collective activities, and where the leader is an expert in learning processes (Zuber-Skerritt, 2002). In action learning, people learn to act effectively starting from the analysis and interpretation of their past experiences, with the aim of identifying the process that generated the learning (Zuber-Skerritt & Wood, 2019). For action learning to be effective, at least three characteristics must be present (see Leonard & Marquardt, 2010; Lizzio & Wilson, 2004; O’Brien, 1998): (1) the action takes place in real contexts, rather than in simulation contexts, so the participants are asked to work on defined and concrete projects; (2) the involvement of all the participants of the group is expected, working on the same or on different projects; and (3) the focus is mainly on the learning process, not only on the actions performed by the group. In order for there to be real learning, it is necessary to reflect on that experience, to identify exactly what has been learned, to internalize the lessons, and to devise action plans to deal with new and different situations. This chapter taps into educators’ first-hand experience relating to the adoption of online technologies in an action learning process during the pandemic. To this purpose, the case study of a University Master Course in leadership and change management is carried out, through a qualitative approach based on primary sources – mainly interviews and direct observation – and secondary data. The master is based on an integrated educational approach that connects conceptual learning, experiential learning, and action learning. The redesign of action learning sessions caused by the pandemic emergency produced unexpected consequences that led the directors to refocus the action learning. The case study shows how the adjustments devised to cope with the consequence of teamwork virtualization, proved to be synergistic, delivering positive outcomes in terms of participants satisfaction, learning and impact, and producing deeply innovative change management projects. This is an experience of reorganizing

Action Learning During Covid-19 Pandemic    111 an educational pathway to meet the new needs and requirements triggered by the Covid-19 pandemic. What could have been an afterthought has become an appreciated and valued method. This chapter is structured as follows. The Introduction is followed by a treatment of the theoretical framework focused on education and technology, especially in light of the innovations generated and caused by the pandemic. This is followed by the Methodological section, with Findings from the study, and Discussion of theoretical and practical implications.

2. Literature Review 2.1. Learning Paths in the New Technological Environment The world is experiencing a revolution in education. This is the second educational revolution, almost 200 years after the first one that took us from apprenticeship to mass schooling. It’s caused by all the new technologies that have been invented in the last few years and that are disrupting the very idea of learning. A new form of education, which has been developed in recent years, is blended learning, which combines personal interaction from live class sessions with online education for greater learning flexibility (Hrastinski, 2019). The result is a more streamlined course that enhances student learning, provides targeted instruction to individual students, serves a larger group of students than a traditional studio, and does not increase faculty workload (Rasheed, Kamsin, & Abdullah, 2020). In such a direction, the teaching and learning environment is one of many that have been positively influenced by technological developments, as these offer opportunities for improved experiences and new skill sets such as collaborations, innovative application of knowledge, critical thinking, and more (Chou, Wu, & Tsai, 2019). Indeed, technology offers immeasurable opportunities to learn, to teach more effectively, and to contribute to the knowledge-building process. At the same time, however, advances in ICT create challenges for the field of education. As reported in the literature (e.g., Daniela et al., 2018; Daniela & Visvizi, 2022; Visvizi & Daniela, 2019), the following three issues constitute the key factors that condition the possibility of adding value in education through technology-enhanced learning (TEL): ⦁⦁ teachers’ ICT literacy and competence in the use of technology to ensure effec-

tive TEL;

⦁⦁ the induction of students to ICT and the development of ICT skills to interact

with technologies to learn and build their knowledge in the TEL process; and

⦁⦁ sustainable and sustainability education.

Central in the debate on sustainable development, indeed, is the imperative of advancing equality in opportunities which requires a careful focus on promoting societies and individuals’ worldviews, knowledge, and skills conducive to their ability to recognize, seize, and multiply opportunities that exist. In this context, education, thanks to advances in ICT, plays the role of a key enabler.

112    Francesca Loia and Davide de Gennaro New technological environment may enhance the efficiency of teaching and learning processes, and, thus, may substantially contribute toward the goals and objectives associated with sustainable inclusive growth and development (Visvizi et al., 2018). This is also in line with the new educational paradigm, that is, education for sustainable development (ESD) (Leicht, Heiss, & Byun, 2018), which is far more than teaching knowledge principles that are related to sustainability: it is education for social transformation, a broad concept that can bring a distinctive orientation to management education (Cebrián, Junyent, & Mulà, 2020; Kioupi & Voulvoulis, 2019; Rieckmann, 2018). Its features are consistent with the perspectives of sustainable development, as highlighted by UNESCO (2012), which are as follows: (1) interdisciplinary and holistic: learning content is embedded in the whole curriculum, not articulated in separate subjects; (2) value-driven: it is critical that the assumed norms – the shared values and principles – are made explicit so that they can be examined, debated, tested, and applied; (3) based on critical thinking and problem-solving: this leads to confidence in addressing the identified dilemmas and challenges; (4) focused on the “soft skills”: this allows to innovate in people management and leadership practices; and (5) multimethod: teaching that is limited simply to transferring knowledge is replaced by an approach in which teachers and learners work together to acquire knowledge and play a role in shaping the environment, by means of different methodologies, such as word, art, drama, debate, and experience. However, rather than innovating the educational approach, most innovators in education have focused only on technological innovations, namely the implementation of mass e-learning and the use of new technologies in classrooms, such as big data analytics, serious games, and business simulations (Auger, Mirvis, & Woodman, 2018). For this reason, while the effective use of technology in the classroom is appreciable, however, there is a need to really “transform students into active knowledge seekers and experiential learners driven by motivation and values,” which requires, on their part, a high level of commitment and much more effort (Bratianu, Hadad, & Bejinaru, 2020). Therefore, innovative pedagogies that can be described as “reflective” and “critical” are needed, focusing on the development of tacit knowledge or intuition. In this sense, a considerable rethinking of contemporary education model is needed if education is to make our societies more resilient to the challenges generated by the twenty-first century (Visvizi, Lytras, & Daniela, 2019).

2.2. Innovative Learning Approaches in View of the Covid-19 Challenges Starting from the widespread of the Covid-19, there has been a significant increase in usage of ICT in the education context (Daniel, 2020). The pandemic context has seriously affected the education system worldwide (Onyema et al., 2020) and, as a consequence, the e-learning approach has been suddenly implemented to face the dramatic pandemic challenge (Almaiah, Al-Khasawneh, & Althunibat, 2020; Mouratidis & Papagiannakis, 2021). Specifically, home quarantine during the Covid-19 pandemic has created challenges for teaching across the world and

Action Learning During Covid-19 Pandemic    113 called for the adoption of innovative teaching and learning approaches (Yu, Liu, Huang, & Cao, 2021). Given the rapid development of teachers’ online learning and teaching, identifying effective ways to facilitate innovative education under such challenging conditions is a critical issue. For instance, Yu et al. (2021) proposed a can-do motivating model of teacher efficacy in fostering innovative teaching through informal learning which is based on three properties of online education: social interaction, autonomous learning, and novelty seeking. In such a direction, as Bratianu (2020, p. 213) has highlighted, “the process of knowledge transfer should be considered in its complexity of interaction of all three fundamental fields of knowledge, i.e., rational, emotional, and spiritual knowledge.” Rational knowledge is explicitly expressed by people and embedded in all kinds of documents, from legislation to work procedures; emotional knowledge is the result of our bodily reaction to the environment, that is, the result of experiential learning; spiritual knowledge includes opinions, beliefs, values, and norms which are embedded in organizational culture and organizational behavior. The traditional educational model is based on rational knowledge because it is explicit and can be easily shared, stored, retrieved, and processed in organizations (Bratianu, 2020), while the other forms of knowledge are implicit or tacit, as defined by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995). Traditional training involves a hierarchical relationship between teacher and learner that privileges the explicit knowledge of the teacher over the tacit knowledge of the learner. However, in contemporary organizations, in the context of a volatile, unpredictable, and complex network of economic, socio-political, and technological relationships, and especially in knowledge-oriented organizations that place considerable emphasis on creativity (Dörfler & Ackermann, 2012), explicit knowledge is less valuable than implicit knowledge. This evolution promotes new educational approaches, in which the learner is at the center of the educational process. Examples include: inquiry-based-learning or “dialogical mediated inquiry,” a complex process of investigation that dialogically generates multiple perspectives (Tsoukas & Dooley, 2011); communities of practice as “situated learning sites” (Pattinson, Preece, & Dawson, 2016), where “a dialogue between problems and whole situations is proposed” (Mengis, Nicolini, & Swan, 2018, p. 598); a critical, reflective, and philosophically informed case method, which adopts a stakeholder perspective and draws on theoretical tools beyond the mainstream approaches (Hjorth & Johannisson, 2009); problem-based learning or project-based learning, which incorporate real-time problems or projects into management practice (Coronado, Moyano, Romero, Ruiz, & Rodríguez, 2021); action learning, where students are immersed in real-life experiences or microcosms “that mimic as closely as possible the real world and real pressures” (Chang & Rieple, 2018, p. 493) and has been recognized as adaptive means to enact change in their particular organizational context during Covid-19 times (Winterburn, 2021); and critical action learning, in which students focus on the underlying emotions and power relationships that “both promote and impede” their “attempts to learn and make things better” (Vince, Abbey, Langenhan, & Bell, 2018, p. 86). These studies refer primarily to face-to-face experiences, while

114    Francesca Loia and Davide de Gennaro there is little evidence of their virtual variety and, consequently, a lack of understanding of how to proceed, that is, how to stimulate problem-solving, critical thinking, and reflective thinking in a distance learning environment. The competencies of such innovative approaches, fully legitimized by the United Nations Principles for Responsible Management Education (UNPRME) (Bell & Bridgman, 2017), do not necessarily entail abandoning the traditional approach that promotes analytical skills. Recent debates about innovative pedagogies reaffirm the importance of non-extreme viewpoints and integrative learning methods that position experiential learning alongside classroom-based lectures in context-sensitive learning cycles (Rodgers, Simon, & Gabrielsson, 2017), thus combining the practical wisdom of phronesis with the universal knowledge of traditional learning through representation in the context of classroom instruction (Statler, 2014). This is also consistent with ESD principles suggesting the use of a variety of pedagogical techniques, as outlined by UNESCO (2012). Therefore, although research and assessments have been carried out on the virtualization of frontal instruction, little attention has been paid to innovative learner-centered methods, such as action learning. To fill this gap, in the next paragraph, a case study is proposed based on a virtuous experience of action learning in a pandemic period.

3. Methodology 3.1. Approach This study puts under the magnifying glass the experience of the University Master Course in “Leadership, Change Management and Digital Innovation” (LCMDI), promoted by the University of Salerno in collaboration with the Center for High Defense Studies (CASD) in Italy. With the aim of investigating the integrative teaching approach proposed in the University Master Course, an empirical analysis has been carried out through a case study analysis. In fact, since the issues related to the educational challenges during Covid-19 are related to chaotic context characterized by several variables involved, set of events, and categories of stakeholders with different interests, the methodology of a case study seems to be more appropriated in order to frame the point of view in terms of opportunities and challenges of different types of users involved. In this sense, methodology of case study is particular useful in the development of a holistic standpoint on context-specific and intricate situations (Wilson, 1979; Yin, 2009). According to Yin (2009), case study is an empirical investigation focused on the phenomena analysis and seeks to observe them in their uniqueness, as part of a particular scenario and its interactions. Therefore, case study is grounded on a qualitative investigation that pursues to investigate the “meaning” of reality by considering people’s personal experience and perspective. This methodology is generally adopted when the research questions generally are “how?” and “why?” (Yin, 2013), that is, when it is difficult to understand events and behaviors, or when it can be useful to examine phenomena through direct observation and interviewing people involved in the events. The case study, in fact, represents a

Action Learning During Covid-19 Pandemic    115 research path on a particular contemporary phenomenon within the real-life context (Yin, 2009). Case studies present many vantages in terms of profundity of the analysis, high conceptual validity, understanding of context and process, and the ability to promote new hypotheses and new research questions for further investigating a phenomenon (Yin, 2013). Through this type of research, data is not produced in the form of numbers (Punch, 2013) but, through a qualitative and exploratory approach (Guba & Lincoln, 1994), the accurate description of moments, meanings, and problems related to people’s lives is obtained by using a wide range of interconnected methods, with the aim of obtaining a better solution or understanding on the topic of interest.

3.2. Sample Based on the above, the case study of the LCMDI University Master Course has been identified for the analysis. The LCMDI University Master Course is aimed at providing leadership skills for small groups, large organizations, and at strategic level, with particular attention to change management in the digital dimension. The teaching program is focused on cross-cutting issues that affect both public and private organizations and explores strategic issues and the broad spectrum of the digital dimension, including cybersecurity. It follows a methodological approach based on innovative teaching techniques, that is, experiential and integrated training modules in different locations (both military structures and academic institutions and venues) and intense group work and projects oriented at solving problems through change management techniques. Participation in the LCMDI University Master Course is open to senior officers of the Armed Forces and Law Enforcement personnel, managers and executives of public administrations, public services, and private companies. The program is divided into two phases. First, learners focus and explore the issues in depth by conducting a context analysis and then they develop responses in peer groups, with guidance from a team of experienced professors, officers, and supervisors. The goal is to produce, at the same time, high-quality training and organizational results, in a mutually reinforcing cycle. Ultimately, the LCMDI University Master Course aims at concretely overcoming traditional schemes inadequate with respect to volatile, uncertain, complex, ambiguous, and rapidly evolving scenarios through a strong investment in training and a fully aware development of the digital dimension. The Covid-19 pandemic had a major impact on the planned activities of the LCMDI University Master Course, resulting in this case study.

3.3. Data Analysis To conduct the case study, the recommended use of multiple sources of evidence and data collection methods is one that allows for depth and breadth of investigation (Merriam, 1998; Stake, 1995; Yin, 2009). In light of this, the analysis is based

116    Francesca Loia and Davide de Gennaro on 12 semi-structured interviews conducted with internal key informants (these were two research assistants recruited as Master’s participants), focus group and reports, and supporting materials written by academic observers and supervisors. The interviews lasted 60 minutes on average and were composed by openended questions related to teaching and learning approaches. The interviews were transcribed by notes and recorded to guarantee a more consistent transcription and for data analysis (Creswell, 2012). We incorporated the evidence that emerged in subsequent interviews (progressively enriching the interview schedule), cycling through the process of data collection, analysis, and interpretation. In the quest for understanding, we held online discussions with participants (course staff and students) as partners in knowledge discovery and generation. We presented the final results in the form of a narrative, thus avoiding the reductionist methods of many social science investigations, which dissolve the links that hold social phenomena together. We used a selection of the original responses to convey the results, as suggested by Stake (2008) and compared the results to the literature in the discussion.

4. Findings and Discussion In this section, we present evidence to answer the research question based on the analysis of the interviews and supplementary materials collected. Several highlights emerged in relation to the innovative teaching techniques implemented during the LCMDI University Master Course, as also highlighted in the Table 1.

4.1. Challenges The pandemic emergence forced the universities and public facilities to close all in-presence activities and introduce online didactic methods according to national lockdowns and guidelines. This was the first and main challenge educators had to face, even considering the lack of advance notice and the desire to ensure adequate training results even in the particularly uncertain period of the Covid-19 pandemic. In the first few months of implementation of online teaching, several educators highlighted that class performance was regarded as a little below the expectations, when considering the high potential of the selected participants. This under-performance continued over the second part of the course, in which the organizational analysis was just surfaced; in particular, participants carried out their stakeholder analysis task, but did not go in depth in the exam of the motivations, financial, or emotional interests of the stakeholders, as well as of the strategies to win their support or to manage their opposition. Furthermore, a number of students reported complaints to the course staff. In the in-depth interviews it emerged that, despite general positive feedback coming from the class, there were some critical issues regarding the “quantity” and the “quality” of knowledge exchanges. First, a reduction of participation both in the teamwork sessions and in the plenary discussion was observed: as compared to the teamwork sessions made in presence during the first part of the

Action Learning During Covid-19 Pandemic    117 Table 1.  Results Overview. Innovative Action Learning Approaches During Covid-19 Times

Insights

Challenges

• Transition to virtual delivery • Digitalization

Implementation of innovative • Action learning learning approaches • Supporting resilient thinking • Sharing of rational and emotional knowledge • Focus on creativity Impact on students

• Empowerment • Development of new set of skills (as coaching skills, relation skills, and soft skills) • Progress against personal objectives and preceptorship core competences • Development of critical thinking • Informal learning

Impact on educators

• Focus on coaching approach • Soft skills development • Focus of smart leadership

Source: Authors’ elaboration.

program, in the online sessions more density of verbal interactions was recorded, but the exchanges involved a lower number of participants, who tended to prevail more and more in the discussions. Regarding the quality of knowledge exchanges, these were mostly limited to explicit knowledge and, according to the observers, tended to include pre-constituted ideas, unauthentic meanings, and domesticated rules of analysis. A student reported of being “bored to listen theoretical concepts repeated hundreds of times.” Another student highlighted that “the plenary discussion did not appear to be genuine, as if the people felt inhibited.” Other students reported that they felt unprepared – due also to the e-learning mode – and pressured as a result of being continually monitored. In light of this, the LCMDI University Master Course managers decided to revise the strategy with a view to reconfiguring the program in the light of the new scenario.

4.2. Implementation of Innovative Learning Approaches After detecting some malcontents by the students, an innovative learning approach based on action learning has been implemented in the LCMDI University Master Course during the e-learning period. Adjustments in the structure

118    Francesca Loia and Davide de Gennaro of teamwork sessions were introduced, in order to stimulate intuitive reasoning and facilitate the communication flow. Informal meetings were organized after the online recorded sessions, as a completion ritual, allowing for participants to talk about how they felt about the session, what they learnt, and what they valued in each other. It appeared to be a powerful way for seeking to develop intimacy, openness, and reflexivity in virtual teamwork and to facilitate the exchange of tacit knowledge. “After initial inhibition, it seems to me that participants opened up and went deeper and faster” reported an educator. Furthermore, a new approach for the project work sessions was developed by the managers, inspired by the socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization (SECI) model, to stimulate the free flow of implicit and explicit knowledge during online groupwork sessions. This model, proposed by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), consists of four stages, characterized by the type of transformation and processing depending on the types of knowledge (T = tacit, E = explicit), is based on SECI: knowledge generation is like a spiral process that keeps going through these four stages. First, educators posed five challenging questions to the participants that are connected virtually. To give a response, participants were pushed to intuitive processing, drawing on their tacit knowledge. Gradually, participants appreciated this approach which creates a “lightbulb moment,” as reported by one interviewee, and “can be more satisfying than traditional e-learning lessons.” Subsequently, a brainstorming phase based on parallel virtual coffee-break conversations by the groups pushed them to discuss about the questions and choose a particular answer/solution/resolutive approach. Later, educators reported the responses of the groups in a synoptic table and asked to the group members to identify the best value proposition. Each participant, in turn, was called to illustrate his/her responses and to share his/her tacit knowledge (“Socialization” stage of the SECI model, namely T to T). The team facilitator had a list of challenging and appreciative questions to promote discussion and brainstorming. After, the educator led the group to converge toward one or two drafts of shared value proposition, representing the reconceptualization of the value creation system of an organization according to a process of collective intuition, according to the Externalization stage of the SECI model (T to E). Then, the educator – according to the Combination stage of the SECI model (E to E) – tried to push the conversation to share and integrated explicit knowledge. Finally, the Internalization stage aimed at stimulating metacognitive competencies, and it entailed a collective reflection concerning the process of learning itself (rather than the value creation system) and final take-home messages were collectively distilled. According to the interviews, there is the widespread opinion that this innovative approach based on action learning has increased the engagement of students and educators. One student reported: “I finally felt involved in what I was studying!”; another student highlighted “After the class, I really felt I had internalized what I had studied by putting the theoretical principles into practice!” Another student reported his experience: “It was so engaging to interact with the other students in the group and share ideas and thoughts on the questions.” Moreover, also the educators felt much more engaged in the learning process. One educator

Action Learning During Covid-19 Pandemic    119 reported: “Action learning is learning by doing … but doing at the highest level possible!” One educator highlighted: “At the university, it is the moving beyond the theory of the classroom and engaging the world around us to engage the mind, skill, and genius of the student – this is the magic of learning.” Another educator stated that Action learning is dynamic, it is a passionate learning that uses the high perception and reasoning of the student in pursuing understanding and engages that understanding to bring about positive change and increased knowledge, while addressing pressing needs and complexities of our world. Furthermore, in order to facilitate the free flowing of communication, a virtual space has been created where group members could freely interact on a social level (e.g., virtual coffee or appetizers, virtual winery tour and tasting). In this way, it was created a community based on active learning approach. A student reported: “Virtual spaces help us to pursue higher-learning by engaging in focused activities and relational moments which naturally bring greater understanding and skill.” Another student reported: “These moments help us to move beyond just meeting, talking, and engaging in regular activities; we actively engage in becoming so much more passionate about our studies.” In such a direction, the main disadvantages related to e-learning – that is, inadequate communication, support, and interaction – have been limited thanks to the action learning approach. In this way, communication has been reciprocal and based on active listening and questioning. Action learning-based approach has offered a constructive challenge that, over time, has been able also to strengthen relationships – indeed, several groups created WhatsApp chats for informal support outside the meetings. Thanks to this approach, there was plenty of interaction that would not have existed in the event that there was traditional teaching. In addition, the structured process with regular stages provides protected space for less-vocal participants. As action learning is dialogue based, it requires active engagement rather than the passive participation that can occur when watching talks, slideshows, or videos. There was still a chance to work in pairs or trios in breakout rooms, building confidence for more-reticent participants.

4.3. Impact on Students On the basis of the data collected, it was possible to evaluate the effects of the program (and of its reconfiguration) on learners’ satisfaction, participation, learning, and competencies. The effects were mainly positive, thus corroborating the literature concerning integrative learning methods, as well as the new perspectives on ESD, and proving the effectiveness of the strategic reorientation that followed the post-pandemic virtualization. The introduction of informal moments produced an emotional improvement that also influenced cognitive and practical abilities. Participation increased significantly, and several “timid” participants, who had shown low propension for a critical approach, re-flourished in the new setting. The interactions, previously mechanical and instrumental, had gradually become increasingly filled

120    Francesca Loia and Davide de Gennaro with emotions and feelings. Some sub-groups reached a sort of psychological symbiosis – as testimonies the WhatsApp groups. Although the students initially were perplexed about this innovative approach, then they started to appreciate this methodology encouraging critical reflexivity. One student reported: I learned to ask myself: how can I improve the quality of services?, how can I manage staff who are more experienced than me?, how can I provide constructive challenge upwards?, how can I influence colleagues to adopt update practice?, but more importantly: how can I get more confidence in myself and my intuition, remaining resilient and avoiding burnout? At the end of the LCMDI University Master Course, most of the final projects were excellent: participants themselves were surprised at how capable they were to elaborate a change project when the conceptual tools were used in the perspective of action, as reported in this interview with a student: “I did not imagine that I could carry out such a project through which I caught a glimpse on my future action.” Active listening and asking open questions are skills that are central to action learning. Once embedded, these skills can greatly improve participants’ professional practice, as shown by these responses: “I have been able to listen and empathize more,” “[Action learning] has improved my knowledge in the competencies and has improved my problem-solving skills in dealing with difficult situations.” Only one participant commented: “If you are introvert in your reflective learning or communicate more effectively on a one-to-one basis, this may not be the ideal learning environment.” However, the vast majority of students experienced action learning as positive. Participants, at the end of course, self-assessed their development against a range of criteria, including development of coaching skills, progress against personal objectives and preceptorship core competences, resolving work-related challenges, and developing supportive relationships. The final output was the pursuit of a more innovative agenda, that stimulated fresh thinking, rather than adherence to a narrow pre-defined problem-solving mode, and this constitutes the real value-adding contribution of the Master program. In addition, the words “confidence,” “support,” and “empowerment,” which are generally qualities that can be harder to impart than explicit knowledge, have been detected during the interviews. In this sense, thanks to action learning practices, students have learned how to negotiate workplace politics, take on new responsibilities, manage more experienced staff, and cope with an under resourced system, all of which were amplified by Covid-19.

4.4. Impact on Educators From the case study analysis related to the LCMDI University Master Course, some positive effects related to the educators arise. In particular, the positive impact of compassionate leadership during the pandemic, the value of a coaching approach – rather than defaulting to authoritative mode, the need to respond to Covid-19’s disproportionate impact on learners have emerged as positive aspects related to the facilitators. However, some educators, due to the very new circumstances, were resistant and found it difficult to accept an action learning approach

Action Learning During Covid-19 Pandemic    121 replacing their comfortable lecturing methodology. They also showed opposition to a further change of approach, which obliged them to study new methods and deal with a higher level of uncertainty on the project output. Here are examples of educators’ complaints: “This new approach makes me so anxious!”; “I am too busy for understanding how to implement this method.” This is line with the concept of “technocratic resistance” (Crozier, 1964). On the whole, the evaluation by the educators was positive and the managers decided to re-propose the master program for the following year and to permanently incorporate the adjustments that were introduced to the virtualized version of the didactic activities.

5. Conclusions The modern technological environment appears to be able to deeply change the world in which we all live every day, and these considerations are amplified with reference to the educational context which has become always more digital and interconnected. E-learning approaches, which were forced by the spread of Covid-19, can offer opportunities for improved experiences and new skill sets such as collaborations, innovative application of knowledge, critical thinking, sustainable education, and more (Daniela et al., 2018; Scott, 2015; Visvizi et al., 2018; Visvizi & Daniela, 2019). However, rather than innovating the educational approach, most innovators in education have focused only on technological innovations. For this reason, while the effective use of technology in the classroom is appreciable, there is a need to rethink the contemporary education model in order to make our societies more resilient to the challenges generated by the twenty-first century (Bratianu et al., 2020; Visvizi et al., 2019). Based on the case study of the LCMDI University Master Course, the action learning experience was perceived very positively by the students and the Master’s managers decided to make the new method based on an action learning approach effective. In this sense, a number of innovations have been introduced permanently in the program, aiming at a redesign of its format, content, and method. The experience has shed light on how to proceed with project-based virtual learning and what the benefits and barriers to adoption are, thus enabling a gap in knowledge to be filled, as highlighted in the literature section. Overall, this innovative approach implemented during the e-learning sessions helps build resilient thinking on the part of both students and educators and managers. In this way, they understood how to react in the face of disturbances, surprises, and uncertainties due to Covid-19 scenario. In particular, a strongly positive aspect perceived by the students concerns the sharing and integration of individual responses in the brainstorming and integration phases that allow knowledge to be built together; moreover, the development of a community introduced an element of informality and helped participants to relax and connect on a deeper emotional level. However, some resistance encountered by some educators to engage in action learning and, more importantly, to adapt their methodology corroborates the findings in the literature (Belet, 2019), indicating that this is not an easy task for many educators, who are accustomed to the ordered and

122    Francesca Loia and Davide de Gennaro predictable teaching models that have dominated universities over time, and are more comfortable offloading their ex-cathedra knowledge within their respective disciplinary domains. They find it difficult to redefine their educational strategy by refocusing their methodology from a digital perspective. Unfortunately, digital resistance is a real and current challenge that should be addressed in the coming years to truly bring fruitful change in the learning system. By now, the lesson learned is that, not to be hoped for as the only pedagogy to follow, distance learning could be considered as a good enough pedagogy to be repurposed in subsequent classes, to complement the in-person sessions, and after all the details have been tested and refined.

References Abumalloh, R. A., Asadi, S., Nilashi, M., Minaei-Bidgoli, B., Nayer, F. K., Samad, S., … Ibrahim, O. (2021). The impact of coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) on education: The role of virtual and remote laboratories in education. Technology in Society, 67, 101728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101728 Almaiah, M. A., Al-Khasawneh, A., & Althunibat, A. (2020). Exploring the critical challenges and factors influencing the e-learning system usage during COVID-19 pandemic. Education and Information Technologies, 25, 5261–5280. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10639-020-10219-y Auger, P., Mirvis, P., & Woodman, R. (2018). Getting lost to find direction: Grounded theorizing and consciousness-raising in management education. Management Learning, 49(4), 453–470. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507618776595 Belet, D. (2019). Renewing management education with action learning. In H. Şenol (Ed.), Educational leadership, (pp. 35–48). London: IntechOpen. Bell, E., & Bridgman, T. (2017). Why management learning matters. Management Learning, 48(1), 3–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507616679058 Bratianu, C. (2020). Designing knowledge strategies for universities in crazy times. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 8(3), 209–223. https://doi.org/ 10.2478/mdke-2020-0014 Bratianu, C., Hadad, S., & Bejinaru, R. (2020). Paradigm shift in business education: A competence-based approach. Sustainability, 12(4), 1348. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su12041348 Cebrián, G., Junyent, M., & Mulà, I. (2020). Competencies in education for sustainable development: Emerging teaching and research developments. Sustainability, 12(2), 579. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020579 Chang, J., & Rieple, A. (2018). Entrepreneurial decision-making in a microcosm. Management Learning, 49(4), 471–497. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507618777929 Chou, T. L., Wu, J. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2019). Research trends and features of critical thinking studies in e-learning environments: A review. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(4), 1038–1077. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633118774350 Coronado, J. M., Moyano, A., Romero, V., Ruiz, R., & Rodríguez, J. (2021). Student long-term perception of project-based learning in civil engineering education: An 18-year ex-post assessment. Sustainability, 13(4), 1949. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/ su13041949 Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. Crozier, M. (1964). Le Phénomène Bureaucratique. London: Tavistock Publications.

Action Learning During Covid-19 Pandemic    123 Daniel, S. J. (2020). Education and the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospects, 49(1), 91–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09464-3 Daniela, L., & Visvizi, A. (2022). Remote learning in times of pandemic: Issues, implications and best practice. London: Routledge. Daniela, L., Visvizi, A., Gutiérrez-Braojos, C., & Lytras, M. D. (2018). Sustainable higher education and technology-enhanced learning (TEL). Sustainability, 10(11), 3883. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10113883 Dörfler, V., & Ackermann, F. (2012). Understanding intuition: The case for two forms of intuition. Management Learning, 43(5), 545–564. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1350507611434686 Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2, 163–194. Hjorth, D., & Johannisson, B. (2009). Learning as an entrepreneurial process. Revue de lEntrepreneuriat, 8(2), 57–78. Hrastinski, S. (2019). What do we mean by blended learning? TechTrends, 63(5), 564–569. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00375-5 Kioupi, V., & Voulvoulis, N. (2019). Education for sustainable development: A systemic framework for connecting the SDGs to educational outcomes. Sustainability, 11(21), 6104. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11216104 Leicht, A., Heiss, J., & Byun, W. J. (2018). Issues and trends in education for sustainable development (Vol. 5). Paris: UNESCO Publishing. Leonard, H. S., & Marquardt, M. J. (2010). The evidence for the effectiveness of action learning. Action Learning: Research and Practice, 7(2), 121–136. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/14767333.2010.488323 Lizzio, A., & Wilson, K. (2004). Action learning in higher education: An investigation of its potential to develop professional capability. Studies in Higher Education, 29(4), 469–488. https://doi.org/10.1080/0307507042000236371 Mengis, J., Nicolini, D., & Swan, J. (2018). Integrating knowledge in the face of epistemic uncertainty: Dialogically drawing distinctions. Management Learning, 49(5), 595–612. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507618797216 Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. Revised and expanded from “Case Study Research in Education”. San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass Publishers. Mouratidis, K., & Papagiannakis, A. (2021). COVID-19, internet, and mobility: The rise of telework, telehealth, e-learning, and e-shopping. Sustainable Cities and Society, 74, 103182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103182 Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. O’Brien, R. (1998). An overview of the methodological approach of action research. In R. Richardson (Ed.), Theory and practice of action research, (pp. 1–28). Joao Pessoa: Universidade Federal da Paraíba. Onyema, E. M., Eucheria, N. C., Obafemi, F. A., Sen, S., Atonye, F. G., Sharma, A., & Alsayed, A. O. (2020). Impact of Coronavirus pandemic on education. Journal of Education and Practice, 11(13), 108–121. Pattinson, S., Preece, D., & Dawson, P. (2016). In search of innovative capabilities of communities of practice: A systematic review and typology for future research. Management Learning, 47(5), 506–524. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507616646698 Pokhrel, S., & Chhetri, R. (2021). A literature review on impact of COVID-19 pandemic on teaching and learning. Higher Education for the Future, 8(1), 133–141. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/2347631120983481 Punch, K. F. (2013). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. London: Sage Publications, Inc.

124    Francesca Loia and Davide de Gennaro Rasheed, R. A., Kamsin, A., & Abdullah, N. A. (2020). Challenges in the online component of blended learning: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 144, 103701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103701 Rieckmann, M. (2018). Learning to transform the world: Key competencies in education for sustainable development. Issues and Trends in Education for Sustainable Development, 39, 39–59. Rodgers, W., Simon, J., & Gabrielsson, J. (2017). Combining experiential and conceptual learning in accounting education: A review with implications. Management Learning, 48(2), 187–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507616669479 Smith, P. A. (2001). Action learning and reflective practice in project environments that are related to leadership development. Management Learning, 32(1), 31–48. https://doi. org/10.1177/1350507601321003 Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. London: Sage Publications, Inc. Stake, R. E. (2008). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 119–149). London: Sage Publications, Inc. Statler, M. (2014). Developing wisdom in a business school? Critical reflections on pedagogical practice. Management Learning, 45(4), 397–417. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/1350507614541198 Toquero, C. M. (2020). Challenges and opportunities for higher education amid the COVID-19 pandemic: The Philippine context. Pedagogical Research, 5(4), em0063. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/7947 Tsoukas, H., & Dooley, K. J. (2011). Introduction to the special issue: Towards the ecological style: Embracing complexity in organizational research. Organization Studies, 32(6), 729–735. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840611410805 UNESCO. (2012). Education for sustainable development in action: Learn, train, tools. Retrieved from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/926unesco9. pdf Vince, R., Abbey, G., Langenhan, M., & Bell, D. (2018). Finding critical action learning through paradox: The role of action learning in the suppression and stimulation of critical reflection. Management Learning, 49(1), 86–106. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1350507617706832 Visvizi, A., & Daniela, L. (2019). Technology-enhanced learning and the pursuit of sustainability. Sustainability, 11(15), 4022. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11154022 Visvizi, A., Lytras, M. D., & Daniela, L. (2019). The future of innovation and technology in education: Policies and practices for teaching and learning excellence. Bingley: Emerald Publishing. Visvizi, A., Lytras, M. D., & Daniela, L. (2018). (Re) defining smart education: Towards dynamic education and information systems for innovation networks. In M. Lytras, L., Daniela, & A. Visvizi (Eds.), Enhancing knowledge discovery and innovation in the digital era (pp. 112). Pennsylvania, PA: IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-15225-4191-2.ch001 Wilson, S. (1979). Explorations of the usefulness of case study evaluations. Evaluation Quarterly, 3(3), 446–459. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X7900300307 Winterburn, K. (2021). Adapting for change: Action learning as a method of working with uncertainty. Action Learning: Research and Practice, 18(3), 257–258. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/14767333.2021.1986897 World Economic Forum. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic has changed education forever: This is how. World Economic Forum. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/ agenda/2020/04/coronavirus-education-global-covid19-online-digital-learning/ Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (Vol. 5). London: Sage Publications, Inc. Yin, R. K. (2013). Validity and generalization in future case study evaluations. Evaluation, 19(3), 321–332. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389013497081

Action Learning During Covid-19 Pandemic    125 Yu, H., Liu, P., Huang, X., & Cao, Y. (2021). Teacher online informal learning as a means to innovative teaching during home quarantine in the COVID-19 pandemic. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 2480. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.596582 Zuber-Skerritt, O. (2002). The concept of action learning. The Learning Organization, 9(3), 114–124. https://doi.org/10.1108/09696470210428831 Zuber-Skerritt, O., & Wood, L. (2019). Action learning and action research: Genres and approaches. Bingley: Emerald Publishing.

This page intentionally left blank

Part 3

Moving Forward: Rethinking Education in the Post-Covid-19 World

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 8

Enabling Students’ Uptake of Feedback Anna Moni Abstract In light of a new paradigm to feedback, the focus shifts from how and when instructors deliver feedback to how the learning environment and the feedback practices sustain agentic behavior on feedback. Feedback produces learning if the students are given the opportunity to use and to act on it, and thus to move forward. Ample research on innovative models and designs for feedback and assessment in higher education courses exist. However, a one-size-fits-all model does not exist. Each university setting represents a unique case, and hence the replicability of a model is impossible. This poses a challenge for innovative higher education institutions (HEIs) that consider the promotion of students’ agency on feedback, a distinguishing attribute for their learning experience onsite, and in the Covid-19 inflicted transition to remote instruction. This study used content analysis to investigate how feedback and assessment feedback design, in the online component of a blended course in English for Academic Purposes, can sustain opportunities for feedback encounters and enable student uptake of feedback. After exploring the process of assessment and feedback design, different agents of the course and potential feedback encounters were mapped and analyzed in a sociocultural perspective. An established matrix of feedback for learning was used to investigate and code the feedback encounters generated in the course. The results of the content analysis indicated satisfactory student uptake of feedback and opportunities for potential feedback encounters before, during, and after the assessment. Additionally, the results pointed to the need for more feedforward and self-regulatory commentaries. Keywords: Blended learning; content analysis; course design; higher education; scaffolding; feedback

Moving Higher Education Beyond Covid-19: Innovative and Technology-Enhanced Approaches to Teaching and Learning, 129–145 Copyright © 2023 by Anna Moni Published under exclusive licence by Emerald Publishing Limited doi:10.1108/978-1-80382-517-520231008

130    Anna Moni

1. Introduction In the last decade, scholars have promoted a shift from the old to a new feedback paradigm in HEIs (Carless, 2015): a fundamental change in the way student respond to feedback (Winstone & Carless, 2020). In the old paradigm, feedback is information; it focuses on the transmission of instructor comments to the learner and does not promote learner action on feedback (Carless, 2015). In the new paradigm, the research refers to feedback processes in support of a learning-focused approach where learners are in the position to request, generate, and make sense of feedback, engage in feedback negotiations and self-assessment, and implement feedback (Carless & Boud, 2018; Henderson, Ajjawi, Boud, & Molloy, 2019; Winstone & Carless, 2020). Feedback overcomes the limitations of a unilateral transmission of information from the instructor to the student (Boud & Molloy, 2013; Evans, 2013; Nash & Winstone, 2017); nevertheless, instructor commentaries, core of the old paradigm, are still unquestionably important as they contribute to a two-way dialog (Nicol, 2010). Feedback becomes a dialogic process (Carless, 2015; Nicol, 2010), a shared responsibility (Boud & Molloy, 2013; Carless, 2015; Henderson et al., 2019), and a relational process between the students, the instructor, and the discipline-specific learning environment (Esterhazy, 2019). Hence, in the new feedback paradigm, the focus shifts from how and when instructors deliver feedback to how the learning context, with its feedback practices, create conditions that support learner agency in relation to feedback (Carless & Boud, 2018; Winstone & Carless, 2020). Learners’ agency is the sense of ownership and control over one’s learning; it relates to the learner motivation and responsibility toward the learning process (Larsen-Freeman et al., 2021). “Feedback agentic behavior” (Nieminen et al., 2022, p. 13) depends on the affordances and constraints of the multifaceted ecology of the learning environment and of the feedback processes (Larsen-Freeman et al., 2021). Therefore, feedback produces learning and promotes learner agency, if, in the learning environment, the students are given the opportunity not only to understand where they are going (feed up), how they are going (feedback), and what they have to do next (feed forward) (Hattie & Timperley, 2007), but also to act on feedback (Nieminen et al., 2022). In respect to this, Brooks, Carroll, Gillies, and Hattie’s (2019) matrix of feedback for learning, based on Hattie and Timperley’s (2007) feedback model (a seminal meta-analyses of educational research), proposed a conceptual matrix that encapsulates “the right conditions” (p. 26) for productive feedback. It constitutes “a conceptual model for feedback that can be translated into practice” (Brooks et al., 2019, p. 26) both in onsite and online learning and can help instructor develop deep understanding of the types and levels of feedback needed to promote learning. In the matrix of feedback for learning (Brooks et al., 2019), three types of feedback (up, back, and forward) highlight for teachers the importance for each student to have clarity about the learning intent, the individual progress, and the next steps to improve. Three levels of feedback (task, process, and self-regulatory) demonstrate the need for learners to receive (a) prompts about the task and its learning intention, (b) prompts about the skills and strategies needed to complete a task, and (c) self-regulatory prompts about

Enabling Students’ Uptake of Feedback    131 the learning intention, criteria and self-assessment. The intersection between the three feedback types and levels allows for matching the purposeful feedback types with differentiated feedback levels depending on the learner stage. In fact, the matrix points out that learners require varying input of feedback level according to the learner stage: novice, proficient, and advanced. Novice learners require attention on task level, whereas more advanced learners gain from the intersection of the three types of feedback with process or self-regulatory level commentaries. In relation to the implementation of the new feedback paradigm in HEIs, extensive research has also pointed to the challenges that come from feedback and assessment design. First, feedback size effects, which can range between 0.48 (Wisniewski, Zierer, & Hattie, 2020), 0.70 (Hattie & Clarke 2018), and 0.79 (Hattie & Timperley, 2007), confirm the high degree of variability in the educational context, and the challenge for HEIs to promote feedback and assessment design that sustain productive feedback (Winstone & Carless, 2020) and affordances for agentic behavior (Nieminen et al., 2022). Each university setting is a different case with different dynamics, culture, and disciplinary thinking where the replicability of a feedback and assessment design embedded in instruction is not possible (Bearman et al., 2014; Carless, 2015; Hattie, 2015; Hattie & Timperley, 2007; Henderson et al., 2019; Lashari, Alias, Kesot, & Akasah, 2013; McConlogue, 2020; Nicol, 2010; Shute, 2008). In fact, the use of standardized feedback designs to address diversity and discipline-specific context is a limitation to effective feedback processes (Henderson et al., 2019; Winstone & Carless, 2020). Second, limitations to productive feedback processes are also identified in assessment design, which frequently restricts agentic behavior in response to feedback (Nieminen et al., 2022; Winstone & Carless, 2020), and in feedback design which is subdued to assessment (Esterhazy, Nerland, & Damşa, 2019; Winstone & Boud, 2020). In this perspective, feedback is a process that is intertwined with assessment (formative and summative) but is not subordinated to it; feedback opportunities are not isolated instances following assessment, or instances which can be added to any learning event (Boud & Molloy, 2013; Esterhazy, 2018; Winstone & Carless, 2020). To best sustain learner agency on feedback, feedback needs to be embedded in the disciplinary instructional process, in the ecology of the course, and it has to be “an integral part of course design” (Esterhazy et al., 2019. p. 15). Finally, another challenge resides in the integration of these feedback processes in sound course design and pedagogy in support of active learning, engaged learning communities, and learner autonomy (QM, 2020; Stein & Graham, 2020). All in all, the new feedback paradigm represents an opportunity for innovation in teaching and learning in HEIs. By redesigning instruction in light of this new paradigm, HEIs might (a) address the long dispute on students’ dissatisfaction with feedback (Feedback for Learning: Closing the Assessment Loop, 2018; GCA, 2016; NNS, 2018); (b) deal with the educational challenges inflicted by the Covid-19 remote learning like student engagement, focus on task, and connection with peers, the instructor, and learning environment (Feedback for Learning: Closing the Assessment Loop, 2018; Händel et al., 2020; GCA, 2016; NNS, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021); and (c) facilitate the permanent transition of higher education

132    Anna Moni from traditional to blended/online programs (UNESCO Covid-19 Education Response, 2021) and its inherent challenges. This study, conducted with content analysis, aims to contribute to the understanding of the adequacy of feedback and assessment design of a blended course in English for Academic Purposes to sustain feedback encounters and learners’ uptake of feedback. To capture the complexity of the feedback processes embedded in instruction, feedback is analyzed with a sociocultural perspective where feedback practices are conceptualized as social practices in a discipline-specific context (Esterhazy, 2018, 2019). Empirically, this study uses Esterhazy’s threelayer model (Esterhazy, 2019) to map the relations between the different agents of a blended course and potential feedback encounters. Brooks et al.’s (2019) matrix of feedback for learning is used to investigate and code the feedback encounters generated in the course and the most common types and levels of feedback are sustained by the assessment and feedback design. The over-arching research question (RQ) of this investigation addresses the types and levels of feedback encounters in the blended course stemming from the assessment and feedback design of the online component, looking specifically at the types and levels from (a) the learning content and (b) the instructor, and analyzing (a) levels of task resubmission and (b) student uptake of feedback. After mapping the online component of the course with content analysis, we first investigate the types and levels of feedback supported by the learning content. Second, we explore instructor generated comments on students’ work, and last we analyze the level of task resubmission and student implementation of instructor feedback.

2. Feedback as a Relational Process Esterhazy (2018, 2019), in her study on the reconceptualization of feedback through a sociocultural lens, proposed a conceptual framework that represents feedback as a relational process that emanates from feedback encounters between the learners, the instructor, and the discipline-specific learning environment. Esterhazy (2018, 2019) explained this process in a three-layer model which envisions feedback practices as the interplay of the feedback encounter layer, the course design layer, and the knowledge domain layer. In the feedback encounter layer, feedback encounters generate from the interactions between instructors, students, and discipline-specific resources like assessment criteria, standards, exemplars, knowledge content, and resources. The course design layer comprises the feedback opportunities the instructor and instructional designer plan in the course design which are shaped by the interaction between the different course elements (tasks, resources, technological tools, and distributions of responsibilities among students/instructors). In the knowledge domain layer, feedback practices are shaped by the interplay of the cultural tools (materials and intellectual resources) and the social conventions inherent in the discipline knowledge domain (disciplinary thinking and ways to organize and generate knowledge), norms, and values of a specific course and discipline (Esterhazy, 2019). By focusing on the core issues of the feedback process, Esterhazy provided a framework that resonates with the new feedback paradigm (Winstone & Carless, 2020),

Enabling Students’ Uptake of Feedback    133 where feedback practices are a shared responsibility, generated from the interaction between the agents and the element of a course, and are shaped by epistemic relations. Esterhazy’s framework suggests the disentanglement of feedback and assessment design (Winstone & Carless, 2020). Feedback practices cannot be represented by a linear chain of events following assessment, but by a network with diverse social and epistemic relations (Esterhazy, 2019; Winstone, Balloo, & Carless, 2020). Respectively, the contact between learners–instructor–learning materials, and the ways of organizing and generating knowledge, is inherent in the specific knowledge domain of a discipline (Boud & Molloy, 2013; Esterhazy, 2019; Winstone et al., 2020; Winstone & Carless, 2020).

2.1. Blended Learning: Assessment and Feedback Design Blended learning aims to make teaching and learning experiences more adaptable, efficient, and effective by planning for the best of each modality, both face-to-face and online (Cleveland-Innes & Wilton, 2018; Cronje, 2020; Stein & Graham, 2020). Boosting active learning, building an engaged learning community, and promoting learner autonomy are among the most crucial components of the blended learning pedagogies (QM, 2020; Stein & Graham, 2020). The advantages and affordances provided by the face-to-face and online pedagogies are several: easier access to learning activities, learner “guidance and triggers” (through resources, activities, and assessment) (Stein & Graham, 2020, p. 15), opportunities for individualized learning (e.g., control over the study pace), increased social interaction, more time on task (triggered by instructions, notifications, scaffolds, etc.), and enhanced course design (Cleveland-Innes & Wilton, 2018; QM, 2020; Stein & Graham, 2020). Despite the lack of uniformity in the design and structure of blended learning courses, a growing body of research has shown a clear consensus on research-based frameworks and standards based on course alignment (alignment of course learning outcomes, units’ and lessons’ learning objectives, assessment, learning resource, and activities), engagement, communication, accessibility, and navigation to promote learners’ attainment of the course learning outcomes (Bonk & Graham, 2006; Cleveland-Innes & Wilton, 2018; Cronje, 2020; QM, 2020; Stein & Graham, 2020). Backward design is one of the foundational approaches to course design based on the principle of course alignment with a start-at-the-end approach (McTighe & Willis, 2019; Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). In a backward design approach to course design (McTighe & Willis, 2019; Wiggins & McTighe, 2005), the focus is primarily on student learning and understanding, and on encouraging intentionality during the design process. A three-stage backward design supports the promotion of student learning (McTighe & Willis, 2019; Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). In the first stage, by prioritizing clear course learning outcomes, the focus is on what students are expected to learn in the course. In the second stage, the attention is on the identification of the type of assessment that will produce acceptable evidence of student understanding and proficiency (McTighe & Willis, 2019; Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). In the third stage, the emphasis is on planning the instructional activities that will help students meet the desired results. It is at the second and third stage of a

134    Anna Moni backward design that assessment and feedback design integrate with the course design (Boud & Molloy, 2013; Esterhazy et al., 2019; Goodyear, 2015; Malecka, Boud, & Carless, 2020; McTighe & Willis, 2019; Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). Assessment design is included in the development of the course learning units. At the micro-level, this means that formative assessment for learning and summative assessment are developed along with the design of the learning units, “a body of subject matter that focuses on a major topic and that lasts between a few days and a few weeks” (McTighe & Willis, 2019, p. 201). Formative assessment for learning is part of a sequenced and scaffolded learning unit, which rigorously aligns with all the components of the unit and the established criteria and standards (course learning outcomes, unit learning objectives, learning resources, teaching and learning strategies, formative/summative assessment, criteria, standards, and mindful integration of technology to best support learning and teaching) (Carless, 2015, 2017; Hattie, 2012, 2015, 2018; McConlogue, 2020; McTighe & Willis, 2019; QM, 2020). Research on assessment demonstrated that scheduled ongoing and nested formative assessment creates iterative opportunities for student engagement and progress toward the course learning outcomes (Esterhazy, 2019; Hattie & Clarke, 2018). Assessment design that included opportunities for resubmission of revised formative or summative work reinforces in learners the importance of assessment for learning and creates opportunities to engage with feedforward feedback commentaries and uptake of feedback (Carless, 2015; Esterhazy, 2019). With respect to feedback design, relations between different elements of the learning units need to be planned up-front to create opportunities for productive feedback practices and potential encounters with feedback to happen (Esterhazy, 2018). For feedback design to support and generate an array of opportunities like learner requesting feedback, generating feedback, making sense of feedback, self-assessment, and implementing feedback (Boud & Molloy, 2013; Esterhazy, 2019; Hattie & Clarke, 2018; Winstone & Carless, 2020), it is necessary to plan the relations between resources, tasks, and responsibilities (Esterhazy, 2019). In practical terms, this translates into designing learning paths or units where resources (content, instructions, prompts, scaffolds, and criteria) integrate with tasks and with scheduled and possible feedback encounters (Boud & Molloy, 2013; Esterhazy, 2019; Hattie & Clarke, 2018; Winstone & Carless, 2020). In the context of this research, we will focus on blended learning as an effective and mindful combination of online learning “to supplement and support onsite learning” (Stein & Graham, 2020, p. 10).

3. Method 3.1. The Physical Setting This study took place at Deree, the American College of Greece, a non-profit private HEI, in the blended English for Academic Purposes II (EAP) course of the undergraduate division. In this course, students advance their competence in academic English and become familiar with the methods of college-level study.

Enabling Students’ Uptake of Feedback    135 One of these is the use of feedback for learning, skill needed to succeed in the academic programs, to foster long-life learning. The course was built in, Blackboard Learning Management System, by the director of the program of English for Academic Purposes and instructional designer together with the team of the EAP instructors. Following the institutional policy on blended course (30–50% of face-to-face teaching is delivered through online format and pedagogy), the specific EAP blended course offers 6 hours in-class and 3 hours asynchronous online. The course design followed a backward design approach. Discipline-­ specific methodology was addressed with Long and Doughty’s (2009) methodological principles of language teaching, for example, using task as the unit of analysis, promoting learning by doing, and exposing students to a variety of sources. The blended course design incorporates both online components and classroom learning for a 13-week instruction. In conformity with the teaching and learning institutional policy, instruction includes inter-alia structured and focused small and large-group discussions, structured and focused writing activities in which students produce, share, and submit writing individually or collaboratively, listening and reading comprehension activities, peer feedback, timely instructor feedback, one outside-of-class meeting with the instructor, office-hour meetings, and group/ individual tutorials through the Student Academic Support Services. The 13-week instruction is organized into weekly folders with two sub-folders for the in-class component and the online component (see Fig. 1). Each online week, with the exclusion of the final week, contains: a weekly overview with measurable learning objectives aligned to the course learning outcomes, learning resources, success criteria, standards, exemplars aligned with the tasks, instructions and prompts for formative and summative assessment, and timelines to consult the resources, to complete readings and tasks, and scheduled feedback encounters. The learning resources and activities are paced and scaffolded and partly delivered in a learning module that allows specific sequencing and integration of the diverse components of the multi-week unit. Formative assessments are performed with discussion board tools to support conversation among peers and opportunities for resubmission. VoiceThread application which offers multiple ways of engaging students (text, audio comment, video comments, and doodle) is used to guide reflection on the writing process. A journal helps students think over their work as a part of a meta-cognitive process. Blackboard quizzes, for the language activities, provide automated correction. Summative assessment comes in the form of multi-staged assessments that are submitted in Blackboard assignment and in Turnitin and which include provisions for resubmission of tasks.

3.2. The Dataset and the Data Collection Institutional Review Board approval was granted prior to data collection. Prior to the dataset collection, to identify the potential feedback encounters in the blended course, the researcher mapped the online component of the course to Esterhazy’s (2019) three-layer model. The course mapping revealed that the multi-week unit design enacted a possible network of potential feedback relations, traceable to the interdependence of its components (the learning resources, the tasks, and

Online activities

Fig. 1.  Example of a Weekly Structure.

In-class activities

Week

Task: instructions, prompts, rubrics

Resubmission

Peer-review: instructions, prompts, rubrics; Instructor feedback

Weekly overview with analytic learning objectives and suggested time pacing

Learning module: content, exemplars, standards, criteria, in built-tasks with intercative tools

Weekly folder with description of learning objiectives

136    Anna Moni

Enabling Students’ Uptake of Feedback    137 the planned feedback encounters: instructor feedback, peer feedback, automated feedback, and self-assessment). A network of potential feedback relations was detectable within a week and within multiple weeks, when scaffolded task, peer reviews, and resubmission were at play. The dataset used in this research was generated in the online component of 5 sections of the EAP blended course offered in a spring semester with a population of 5 instructors and 52 students. The researcher focused on weeks 1–12; week 13 was not included as it did not qualify for the content analysis. The dataset is composed of artifacts that include the instructor generated feedback commentaries to the formative and summative assessments submitted by the students, to the peer feedback commentaries, all formative and summative assessments with the respective resubmissions, and the instructions, prompts, scaffolds, criteria, and rubrics. Taking into consideration the information-rich setting provided by the different elements of the online components and its potential to illuminate and to align with the inquiry’s purpose (Krippendorff, 2018; Patton, 2015), the artifacts, generated in the course, were purposefully sampled, and the researcher, prior to beginning the study, adopted a scheme based on a “complete target population” of a one-semester cohort (Patton, 2015, p. 284). Investigating feedback as a relational process where epistemic and social relations are the results of the interaction between learners, instructor, and the course setting (Esterhazy, 2019), implied recognizing the importance of the contribution of each student and instructor (of the cohort) to this participatory and contextualized process (Patton, 2015). A total of 533 documents (with 7.666 segments, and 151.767 words) were sampled. The data on task resubmission was retrieved from Blackboard grade center.

3.3. Content Analysis and Coding This study was performed with content analysis. In the last two decades, content analysis has been adopted in a variety of educational research including research on asynchronous communication (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2007; Neuendorf, 2017). By looking directly at communication through texts or transcripts (Cohen et al., 2007) and, therefore, falling within the central aspect of social interaction, content analysis drives to the identification of patterns and themes (Patton, 2015). It provides both qualitative and quantitative insights; it is a discreet means of analyzing interactions and it provides an understanding of complex patterns of human thought and relations within a given setting (Cohen et al., 2007; Krippendorff, 2018; Patton, 2015). For the content analysis, the researcher followed Krippendorf’s (2018) set of instructions: unitizing, sampling, coding, reducing data, and methods for statistically summarizing or simplifying data. Coding was performed with MAXQDA 2020 software. Brooks et al.’s matrix of feedback for learning was used to investigate and code the instructions, prompts, scaffolds, instructors’ feedback commentaries in the online component of the blended course. Coding units were reduced at meaningful sentences (Brooks et al., 2019; Strijbos, Martens, Prins, & Jochems, 2006). Strijbos et al.’s (2006) unit of analysis and segmentation procedure were adopted. The coded segments were analyzed according to the relative frequency of each feedback code in relation to

138    Anna Moni the total feedback and of the learners’ uptake of feedback code in relation to the total opportunities to act on feedback generated by the instructors. Memos were used to reflect on the use of prompts and strategies of the coded segments as suggested by the literature review and the matrix of feedback for learning (Brooks et al., 2019). The comparison between coded segments with the instructor feedback on the students’ work and resubmission allowed the identification of uptake of feedback. Around 10% of documents were coded by a second coder with the purpose of improving the intercoder reliability (Patton, 2015). In the four meetings, the two coders discussed the differences and learnt from the differences to improve the coding agreement (Krippendorff, 2018; Patton, 2015). With the four meetings, the intercoder agreement Kappa (Brennan & Prediger, 1981), went from a moderate agreement value of K=0.43 to K=0.65, after the third meeting, and to K=0.71 after the fourth attempt, a substantial improvement in the strength of agreement.

3.4. Results Percentage frequency was used to report the results. The results showed that in the instructions, prompts, and scaffolds of the 12 weeks of the online component of the blended course about 97.83% of coded segments were recorded as feed up type (see Table 1) with a 38.14% of commentaries directed at task level (e.g., “We often make mistakes when writing. On the following slides, you will identify the five most common ones and ways to correct them.”), 36.56% at process level (e.g., “Look at the graphic organizer below that compares Critical and Creative Thinking.”), and 25.30% at self-regulatory level (e.g., “Have I forgotten any important points that would support the development of the essay?”). Feedback commentaries generated by the instructors were constituted mainly by feed back type (76.6% of segments with a code) followed by feed forward (23.4%), as shown in Table 2. Around 84.28% of these segments were directed at task level (e.g., “You need to insert another sentence in between these two to make the transition smoother.”), 12.6% at process level (e.g., “How did you explain each of your Table 1.  Feedback Types and Levels for Feedback Generated by the Course Design. Segments with Code by Feedback Type Segments with Code by Feedback Level Frequency Percentage Feed up

495

97. 83

Feedback

4

Feed forward

7 506

100.00

TOTAL

Frequency Percentage Task level

193

38.14

0.79

Process level

185

36.56

1.38

Self-regulatory 128 level

25.30

TOTAL

100.00

506

Enabling Students’ Uptake of Feedback    139 Table 2.  Feedback Type and Level for Instructor Generated Feedback. Segments with Code By Feedback Type Segments with Code by Feedback Level Frequency Feedback Feed forward TOTAL

2.526

Percentage

Frequency Percentage

76.60

Task level

2.779

84.27

772

23.40

3.298

100.00

Process level

416

12.61

Self-regulatory level

103

3.12

3.298

100.00

TOTAL

points for the reader?”; “What are the two or three main ideas that will help you explain the disadvantages?”), and 3.12% at self-regulatory level (e.g., “Look for online magazines or print magazines and try regularly to read some of the articles. That’s a great way to recycle words you are learning and build vocabulary skills.”). Of a total of 234 expected task resubmissions, 92.30% of tasks were resubmitted and 7.70% of tasks were not resubmitted (see Table 3). Learners’ implementation (uptake) of instructor generated feedback was at 73.70% of coded segments and 26.30% was not implemented (see Table 4). The co-occurrences of codes for implemented feedback showed that 63.01% of feedback type at task level was implemented. This was followed by 24.89% of feed forward type at task level and by 10.55% of feed forward type at process level. Table 3.  Resubmission of Tasks. Number Resubmitted tasks Not resubmitted tasks TOTAL

216

Percentage 92.30

18

7.70

234

100.00

Table 4.  Segments with Code for Implemented and Not Implemented Feedback. Number

Percentage

Implemented feedback

711

73.70

Not implemented feedback

254

26.30

TOTAL

965

100.00

140    Anna Moni Table 5.  Co-occurrences of Codes with Implemented and Not Implemented Feedback. Code System

Feedback task

Implemented Feedback

Not Implemented Feedback

Frequency

Frequency

Percentage

Percentage

448

63.01

196

77.17

Feedback process

8

1.13

5

1.97

Feedback selfregulatory

1

0.14

0

0

177

24.89

33

12.99

75

10.55

20

7.87

2

0.28

0

711

100.00

254

Feed forward task Feed forward process Feed forward selfregulatory TOTAL

0 100.00

Around 77.17% of the co-occurrences of codes for not implemented feedback was identified as feedback type at task level, 12.99% was feed forward type at task level and 7.87% was feed forward type at process level (see Table 5).

3.5. Limitations One of the limitations of this study is related to the content analysis performed with one coder. The presence of more than one coder for the ample amount of data would ensure trustworthiness and would produce richer data analysis. Moreover, some of the artifacts had repeated texts, either because they were part of the instructions, prompts, and scaffolds of each week in each session, or because a few times the same chunks of feedback commentaries were used for different learners. In addition, there was not enough time (a) to investigate the EAP faculty’s and students’ perspective and experience with the feedback process, (b) to assess improvement in the student learning process by comparing results from cohorts in different semesters, and (c) to investigate the possible influence of inclass feedback on the uptake of feedback in the online component of the course. These will be part of the next steps of this research.

4. Discussion The focus of the RQ was investigating the types and levels of potential feedback encounters, which the assessment and feedback design of this course sustained, looking specifically at the types and levels from (a) the learning content and (b) the instructor, and analyzing (a) levels of task resubmission and (b) student uptake of feedback. The results showed that the learning content created opportunities

Enabling Students’ Uptake of Feedback    141 for potential feedback encounters mainly at feed up type with emphasis on all the three levels of feedback (task, process, and self-regulatory). Instructions, prompts, scaffolds, standards, and criteria, nested within the assessment, provided valuable feeding up information in relation to where the learner is going (Brooks et al., 2019; Hattie & Timperley, 2007) and possible encounters at the feedback encounter layer (Esterhazy, 2019). These encounters were confirmed by the instructors’ frequent feedback commentaries (recorded in the memos), which referred to how the learner had received and crucially used the instructions, the prompts, scaffolds, criteria, etc. to successfully complete a task (e.g., “This is a very effective funnel introduction, going from the general to the more specific. It confirms a good use of the learning resources in this week online module”) (Brooks et al., 2019). About the types and levels of feedback instructors generated in the online component of the course, the findings indicated that the most common type of feedback was feedback type (76.60%) followed by minor but still considerable use of feed forward commentaries (23.40%). Both were mainly directed at the feedback task level, with a much lower use of process level feedback, and minimal use of self-regulatory level of feedback. Instructors tended to generate more commentaries at task level (84.27%), with a more conservative use of process level commentaries (12.61%) and very low self-regulatory level (3.12%). Taking into consideration that the aim of the EAP blended course is to take learner from a lower advanced stage of academic language and critical thinking to proficient stage, in agreement with Brooks et al.’s (2019) matrix of feedback for learning, commentaries should include more feedback at process and self-regulatory levels, and thus contribute to deeper-learning knowledge (Brooks et al., 2019). The investigation on the level of task resubmission in the online component of the course, revealed that the rate of resubmission was very high (92.30%). The assessment design with nested, scaffolded, ongoing, and multi-staged created opportunities for resubmission (Carless, 2015; Esterhazy, 2019). Clearly, learners perceived resubmission as a constructive learning opportunity and in a way, it supported students’ self-regulation and taking responsibility over their learning (Carless, 2015). The level of students’ uptake of feedback identified in the resubmitted assessments was much higher than non-implementation of feedback. Students responded satisfactorily to the opportunity of implementing feedback to improve performance/strategies. Students implemented mostly feed back type commentaries directed at task level (63.01%). Analysis of the memos indicated that student implemented feedback when commentaries were non-confirmatory, pointed at the error, and elicited or provided a correct answer (Brooks et al., 2019). A part of feedback opportunities which were not implemented related mainly to the use of feedback type commentaries at task level (77.17%) which provided mainly correct answers that as past research has shown do not always help and trigger implementation (Carless, 2015; Hattie & Timperley, 2007). Around 12.99% of not implemented feedback related to feed forward commentaries at task and process level which respectively elicited the correct answer and pointed out the skills and strategies needed for the task. These commentaries did not trigger students’ action on feedback. These results pointed again back to the need to use different

142    Anna Moni levels and types of feedback commentaries, and to train student to relate to and implement feedback (Brooks et al., 2019).

5. Conclusion Taken together, this research proposed three contributions. First, a principled feedback and assessment design with a backward design approach proved to be a valuable process which created and sustained opportunities for (a) potential and confirmed feedback encounters and engagement of students with feedback before, during, and after the assessment (Esterhazy, 2019), (b) planned up-front feedback encounters (Esterhazy, 2019), (c) resubmission of tasks through the design of nested, scaffolded, ongoing, formative assessment, and summative multi-staged assessment, and (d) feedback agentic behavior: action on and uptake of feedback. Second, the use of Brooks et al.’s (2019) matrix of feedback for learning to investigate and code feedback commentaries proved vital to unveil the need to create the conditions to support learners’ agency on feedback at undergraduate level with more feed forward and self-regulatory instructor feedback commentaries. To encourage learner agency and to assist students in moving from one learner stage to a more advanced one, course design and instructor generated feedback need to create opportunities to provide the learner with clear objectives to focus on tasks, commentaries about one’s progress toward the task, and commentaries to move ahead and improve one’s work. The differentiations of feedback at different levels will promote feedback in relation to the task requirements, to the process, strategies, and skills needed for a task, and to the self-regulatory strategies to plan, monitor and evaluate personal progress. Finally, this study provides insights to instructors and instructional designers regarding how these feedback processes can be integrated in a sound course design created for student agency, focus on task, and interaction with the learning environment. This might serve as one of the ways of dealing with higher education student dissatisfaction with feedback and the educational challenges imposed in HEIs by the Covid-19 pandemic. In this sense, the discipline-specific learning context might support substantial and productive feedback practices, and facilitate students’ adaptation to the online learning experience. As such, a mindful design of the learning environment could help students face the challenges imposed by transition to remote learning and develop the skills and attitudes needed in online instruction: active learning, focus on task, learner engagement in learning community, and learner autonomy agency and autonomy.

Acknowledgment My gratitude goes to the Deree – EAP faculty who consented to this research.

Disclosure Statement No potential conflict.

Enabling Students’ Uptake of Feedback    143

References Bearman, M., Dawson, P., Boud, D., Hall, M., Bennett, S., Molloy, E., & Joughin, G. (2014, September). Guide to the assessment design decisions framework, pp. 1–64. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299291021_Guide_to_the_ Assessment_Design_Decisions_Framework Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (2006). The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer. Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2013). Rethinking models of feedback for learning: The challenge of design. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(6), 698–712. https:// doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2012.691462 Brennan, R. L., & Prediger, D. J. (1981). Coefficient Kappa: Some uses, misuses, and alternatives. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41(3), 687–699. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/001316448104100307 Brooks, C., Carroll, A., Gillies, R. M., & Hattie, J. (2019). A matrix of feedback for learning. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 44(4), 14–32. https://doi.org/10.14221/ ajte.2018v44n4.2 Carless, D. (2015). Excellence in University Assessment: Learning from award-winning practice. London: Springer International Publishing. Carless, D. (2017). Scaling up assessment for learning in higher education. Singapore: Springer (Kindle edition). Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315–1325. doi:10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354 Cleveland-Innes, M., & Wilton, D. (2018). Guide to blended learning. Columbia: Commonwealth of Learning. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. New York, NY: Routledge. Cronje, J. C. (2020). Towards a new definition of blended learning. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 18(2), 114–135. https://doi.org/10.34190/EJEL.20.18.2.001 Esterhazy, R. (2018). Productive feedback practices in higher education. Investigating social and epistemic relations in two undergraduate courses. Doctoral thesis, University of Oslo. Esterhazy, R. (2019). Re-conceptualizing feedback through a sociocultural lens. In M. Henderson, R. Ajjawi, D. Boud, & E. Molloy (Eds.), The impact of feedback in higher education. Cham: Springer International Publishing (Kindle edition). Esterhazy, R., Nerland, M., & Damşa, C. (2019). Designing for productive feedback: An analysis of two undergraduate courses in biology and engineering. Teaching in Higher Education, 26(6), 806–822. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2019.1686699 Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 70–120). https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312474350 Feedback for Learning: Closing the Assessment Loop. (2018). Australian government. Canberra, ACT: Department of Education and Training. Retrieved from https:// nla.gov.au/nla.obj-719788718/view Goodyear, P. (2015). Teaching as design. HERDSA Review of Higher Education, 2(2), 27–50. GCA. (2016). Australian graduate survey 2015. Melbourne: Graduate Careers Australia. https://www.nagcas.org.au/documents/item/402 Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203181522 Hattie, J. (2015). The applicability of visible learning to higher education. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 1(1), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000021 Hattie, J., & Clarke, S. (2018). Visible learning: Feedback. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/ 10.4324/9780429485480

144    Anna Moni Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487 Händel, M., Stephan, M., Gläser-Zikuda, M., Kopp, B., Bedenlier, S., & Ziegler, A. (2020). Digital readiness and its effects on higher education students’ socio-emotional perceptions in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 54(2), 267–280. doi:10.1080/15391523.2020.1846147 Henderson, M., Ajjawi, R., Boud, D., & Molloy, E. (2019). The impact of feedback in higher education. London: Palgrave. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25112-3 Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). London: Sage Publications. Larsen-Freeman, D., Driver, P., Gao, X., & Mercer, S. (2021). Learner agency: Maximizing learner potential [PDF]. Retrieved from www.oup.com/elt/expert Lashari, T. A., Alias, M., Kesot, M. J., & Akasah, Z. A. (2013). An effective-cognitive teaching and learning approach for enhanced behavioural engagements among engineering students. Engineering Education, 8(2), 65–76. https://doi.org/10.11120/ ened.2013.00011 Long, M. H., & Doughty, C. (2009). The handbook of language teaching. Chichester: WileyBlackwell. Malecka, B., Boud, D., & Carless, D. (2020). Eliciting, processing and enacting feedback: Mechanisms for embedding student feedback literacy within the curriculum. Teaching in Higher Education, 27(7), 908–922. doi:10.1080/13562517.2020.1754784 McConlogue, T. (2020). Assessment and feedback in higher education: A guide for teachers. London: UCL Press. McTighe, J., & Willis, J. (2019). Upgrade your teaching. Alexandria, VA: ASCD (Kindle Edition). Nash, R. A., & Winstone, N. E. (2017). Responsibility-sharing in the giving and receiving of assessment feedback. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2017.01519 Neuendorf, K. A. (2017). The content analysis guidebook. London: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071802878 Nicol, D. (2010). From monologue to dialogue: Improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 501–517. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602931003786559 Nieminen, J. H., Tai, J., Boud, D., & Henderson, M. (2022). Student agency in feedback: beyond the individual. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(1), 95–108. 10.1080/02602938.2021.1887080 NNS. (2018). National Student Survey. Retrieved from https://www.officeforstudents.org. uk/advice-and-guidance/student-information-and-data/national-student-surveynss/nss-2018-results/ NNS. (2019). National Student Survey. Retrieved from https://www.officeforstudents.org. uk/advice-and-guidance/student-information-and-data/national-student-surveynss/nss-2019-results/ NNS. (2020). National Student Survey. Retrieved from https://www.officeforstudents.org. uk/advice-and-guidance/student-information-and-data/national-student-surveynss/nss-data-provider-level/ NNS. (2021). National Student Survey. Retrieved from https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/ advice-and-guidance/student-information-and-data/national-student-survey-nss/ nss-data-provider-level/ Patton, M. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. QM. (2020). Quality Matters Higher Education Rubric. Retrieved from https://www. qualitymatters.org/qa-resources/rubric-standards/higher-ed-rubric

Enabling Students’ Uptake of Feedback    145 Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153–189. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795 Stein, J., & Graham, C. R. (2020). Essentials for blended learning (2nd ed.). Essentials of Online Learning. New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor and Francis (Kindle Edition). Strijbos, J. W., Martens, R. L., Prins, F. J., & Jochems, W. M. G. (2006). Content analysis: What are they talking about? Computers and Education, 46(1), 29–48. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.002 UNESCO Covid-19 Education Response. (2021). Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ ark:/48223/pf0000378174.locale=en Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Vol. Expan). Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Winstone, N., & Carless, D. (2020). Designing effective feedback processes in higher education: A learning-focused approach (1st ed.). London: Routledge. https://doi.org/doi. org/10.4324/9781351115940 Winstone, N., Balloo, K., & Carless, D. (2020). Discipline-specific feedback literacies: A framework for curriculum design. Higher Education, 83, 57–77. doi:10.1007/s10734020-00632-0 Winstone, N. E., & Boud, D. (2020). The need to disentangle assessment and feedback in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 47(3), 656–667. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/03075079.2020.1779687 Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020). The power of feedback revisited: A metaanalysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 3087. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 9

Implications of the Covid-19 Pandemic on High School Graduates’ Plans and Education Path Zane Varpina, Kata Fredheim and Marija Krumina Abstract Over the period 2020–2021, Latvian schools experienced one of the longest closure periods in Europe. Hence, Covid-19 significantly impacted high school pupils, especially those graduating in 2021, that is, half of the secondary school program they acquired was delivered remotely. Their learning and social experiences are distinct from that of previous cohorts. The findings are directly relevant for higher education institutions (HEIs) to further adapt to the background and needs of this student cohort. To examine this cohort’s experience, this chapter empirically examines adolescents at the point of their graduation from high school to learn what impact the pandemic has had on their quality education and plans. The findings provide insight into how they evaluate the remote studies and their knowledge, how they perceive their mental state, and what disruption to plans it has caused. The authors learn that most students found remote studies more difficult than onsite learning and associate it with lack of knowledge behind the grades earned. They have experienced lack of motivation and miss real-life communication with their friends, even though they occasionally admit not breaking lockdown rules and meeting peers. The most common concern among graduates is lost opportunities they would otherwise have, however, the authors also notice impressive resilience when they imply that the pandemic has opened new opportunities that otherwise would not be possible, along with self-development and character growth. Overall, the stress level for adolescents was moderate to high. Covid-19 has caused disruptions to plans, some more like opportunities others like limitations. The insights may provide understanding to how

Moving Higher Education Beyond Covid-19: Innovative and Technology-Enhanced Approaches to Teaching and Learning, 147–164 Copyright © 2023 by Zane Varpina, Kata Fredheim and Marija Krumina Published under exclusive licence by Emerald Publishing Limited doi:10.1108/978-1-80382-517-520231009

148    Zane Varpina et al. these students require a very different approach from educators and staff alike. HEIs have the opportunity to adapt and innovate and to custom the content of studies and communication form to the diverse incoming generations. Keywords: Secondary school graduates; adolescents; study plans; Covid-19; pandemic; school-life transition

1. Introduction In 2020, as high school graduates were preparing for their transition to the next chapter of their lives, the world changed. The Covid-19 pandemic rapidly transformed how societies across the world operate. This global phenomenon impacted Latvian pupils too. Latvian secondary schools, like many others, moved to remote studies in mid-Spring 2020. Attending classes in person, or even meeting people, was not possible for most of the following 2020–2021 academic year. By the time adolescents in Latvia graduated from secondary schools in Spring 2021, they spent almost half of their three-year secondary school program studying remotely. Indeed, Latvian high schools had the longest closure period in the European Union (EU). This cohort of students, in Latvia and elsewhere with similar restrictions, are different from graduates the years before because of this experience. Their learning and social experiences are distinct from that of previous cohorts. For the higher education sector, the circumstances and impact of the pandemic on this cohort mean that these students may require a very different approach from educators, recruiters, and other staff HEIs. The pandemic also reduced the movement of people. Since Latvian graduates are highly internally and internationally mobile, restrictions on mobility continue to have an impact on graduate destinations (Fredheim & Varpina, 2022; Varpina & Fredheim, 2022). As the world enters the second winter of the Covid-19 pandemic in Europe, we realize that it is not anywhere close to ending. Thus, the result is possibly permanent changes, and continuous adaptation in the education process during the pandemic and beyond. Until recently, remote learning was a solution mostly used for the adult population (Daniela & Visvizi, 2021), who have more experience to organize their time and effort for studies. The pandemic took education systems by storm in spring 2020 requiring everyone in schools, even the less prepared members of society, to start learning remotely. School children in Latvia – aged anywhere from 7 to 19 – used online platforms and communication tools to learn, submit works, and contact with teachers. Apart from some distance learning secondary education institutions, the environment was not designed and well adapted for fully remote mode. Hence, quality education, in the meaning the concept as outlined by Visvizi, Daniela, and Chen (2020) “assisting individual in the process of growing and excelling both as a person and a member of given society” was challenged. The shortcomings in secondary education send ripple effects into higher levels of education. The cohorts admitted to higher education in 2020–2021 and possibly

Implications of the Covid-19 Pandemic on High School Graduates    149 in the years to come, may have unbalanced experiences – their information and communication technology (ICT) skills are likely superior to the previous enrollments, while social skills and subject knowledge may lag. In contribution to the discussion in this collection, the chapter empirically studies secondary school graduates in Latvia in the middle of the second year of the Covid-19 pandemic. School graduates are clients of HEIs, and the ones entering university are key stakeholders in the system. Even in the years before the pandemic, HEIs started to welcome a different generation of students. While millennials were known to be digital natives, Gen-Z were digital natives in every sense, they have no memories before the Internet. Covid-19 has made both generations still more regular consumers of ICT than they would otherwise be. Admitting this divergent pool of people to higher education presents challenges for institutional change and the need to adapt. We offer a close look at this generation and discuss what potential implications their experiences bring along. At the point of transition to adulthood, the pandemic is likely playing out as an important factor with implications on their view of the world, choices, and further career. Hence, the objective of this chapter is to examine what effects the pandemic has had on adolescents’ schooling, emotional state, plans, and education paths. The study is based on representative survey data collected in Spring 2021, close to the secondary school graduation time, as well as interviews with high school graduates. These findings allow us to gain insight into a very unusual time of a cohort of students who seem to be standing still but would otherwise be on the move. The chapter is structured as follows. First, a brief overview of the Covid-19 pandemic specifics in Latvia insofar as it relates to the school context. Further, we describe our approach and data and follow by detailed analysis and discussion.

2. Covid-19 Pandemic in Latvia Like in most countries, the response to the pandemic in Latvia has been changing between “normal,” “the new normal,” and highly restricted. Periods with low infections and seemingly “normal” life and high infection rates resulting in school closures, meeting restrictions, and lockdowns alternated. The disruption to the education system was arguably the most severe – if it can be measured at all. While many workplaces remained open or been on and off remote work, school doors for secondary school pupils (and higher education students) in Latvia remained closed for 49 weeks in the period between March 2020 and November 2021 (see Fig. 1). This is the longest closure period in EU, followed by Slovenia (47 weeks), the Czech Republic (46 weeks), and Poland (43 weeks). While the Americas and parts of South and Central Asia have kept schools closed even longer, Latvian policies should be seen in the regional context. For comparison, neighboring countries have seen substantially shorter remote studies periods – Estonia half the time (26 weeks) and Lithuania (just like Germany) – 38 weeks. In the context of remote learning, it is important to assess the conditions students have at home and how well they are prepared for studying. The three prerequisites that make remote studies possible are internet connection, a computer

150    Zane Varpina et al.

Fig. 1.  The Total Duration of School Closures. Source: Excerpt from the map, UNESCO Institute for Statistics (2022). available for work, and an appropriate quiet place to study. According to OECD PISA 2018 results, in Latvia, 93% of students have a computer for studies, and 91% have a quiet place to study (OECD, 2020). Both these results stood above the OECD average in 2018, and the availability may have improved in three years with purposefully establishing the conditions that students can study at home. However, there remains a part of students from socially disadvantaged backgrounds where the home environment has not been adjusted for home learning. The situation has been widely reported in analytical media (Re:Baltica, 2021) and social and municipal projects have been available (IZM, 2020). Still, it has to be acknowledged that some adolescents have been underprivileged, while others, primarily from higher social backgrounds have benefited from private tutoring and extra support at home (Re:Baltica, 2021). Life is not all about studies, even for students finishing high school. Restrictions as a response to the pandemic impacted all parts of students’ lives. While these activities are not part of the core education process, the adequate balance of work (here, school), physical activity, and rest have been recognized as preconditions for good academic performance and mental health. It is worth noting that extracurricular activities such as sports, arts, and music have been taking place remotely for even longer periods or closed where the online option is not possible. Restrictions and social changes meant that students’ lives and routines changed, including extracurricular, physical, and social activities. What students do, moved even more online, which impacted their health and behavior. The year before transitioning from high school to higher education or work is always seen as stressful for many students, because of the need to prepare for exams and overall unknown changes in life. Isolation and remote format put additional stress on many.

Implications of the Covid-19 Pandemic on High School Graduates    151 This suggests that the graduating cohort of 2021 may perform differently from previous school leavers and may face different challenges than their predecessors. The switching to remote learning and associated student experience during the pandemic in the world is well documented, and common problems found are mental health, technology knowledge, concentration, engagement, time management, and study–life balance (cf. Besser, Flett, & Zeigler-Hill, 2020; Li, Tang, Wu, Wang, & Li, 2021; Maqableh & Alia, 2021; Walters, Simkiss, Snowden, & Gray, 2021). This is in line with international studies that highlight that both high school students and university students faced increased stress and mental health challenges during the pandemic (Fegert, Vitiello, Plener, & Clemens, 2020; Son, Hegde, Smith, Wang, & Sasangohar, 2020; Wathelet et al., 2020). At the same time, students were very well accustomed to the online learning environment and had fewer difficulties switching to remote studying when required again in October–November 2021. Little is known about high school pupils’ perceptions of their wellbeing, the level of stress, their thoughts of the future, and their next career steps.

3. Methods and Data To better understand the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the lives of students in general and their plans after high school, Stockholm School of Economics in Riga (SSE Riga) together with Baltic International Centre for Economic Policy Studies organized an anonymous survey of secondary school two senior grade (11th and 12th grades) students. It was carried out from October 2020 to April 2021, the majority of responses were between March and April 2021. Pupils answered questions about their plans after high school and about the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on their lives. They also reflected on their experiences and feelings in an open-ended question. Some of the citations from these answers are reported in this chapter. These pupils can be perceived as school graduates as the moment of the survey was chosen as close to their graduation day as possible, but before they exit the school door with a diploma and cannot be realistically reached as a cohort anymore. The survey was organized online, through the channels of schools’ administration and SSE Riga’s high school outreach program. The sample consists of a total of 447 students from schools in the capital Riga (58%), surrounding Pieriga (14%), and regions (28%). Two-thirds of respondents (70%) studied in the final year – 12th grade and 30% were 11th grade students. About 64% of respondents were females, and 24% attended minority schools. The distribution of respondents by relevant demographic characteristics – geographical location, gender, school type, and grade – fits the target group and sample frame. In addition to the survey, 6 youngsters were interviewed within three months of graduation from secondary school, as well as 12 graduates at the beginning of the pandemic (April 2020) to gain a deeper understanding of their feelings and reasoning behind further careers choices, as well as the role of Covid-19 pandemic in their plans. All interviewed students and graduates are 18 and 19 years old unless otherwise noted.

152    Zane Varpina et al. This study uses descriptive analytical approach and applies a classic stress assessment instrument, the perceived stress scale (PSS), adapted to Latvian language by Stokenberga (2008, 2010). The tool, while originally developed in 1983 (Cohen, Kamarck, & Mermelstein, 1983), remains a popular choice for understanding how different situations affect feelings and perceived stress. The questions in this scale ask about feelings and thoughts during the last month. In each case, an individual is asked to indicate how often he/she felt or thought a certain way. The results organized in five areas of interest help to earn knowledge and understanding about the implications of pandemic on the youngsters who are soon to start adult life and many of them – become students in higher education. The areas are: reflections on remote schooling, concerns and perceived impact of Covid-19, stress and emotional state of pupils, and plans after graduation.

4. Results 4.1. Reflections on Remote Schooling and Concerns The ways schools adapted to remote teaching took place quickly. Yet, even a year and a half later, students think remote studies are not a proper replacement for going to school physically: the teaching process was badly influenced … you cannot learn a lot through a device online, moreover if you lack motivation …. Even though, the school was very well prepared and equipped, it still could never replace classes on site. (Irina, person names changed throughout the text). Indeed, in the interviews with graduates, the way schools adapted to remote learning was mentioned as critical. One aspect students highlighted is the education process itself: “To me it left a negative impact for my education. Sitting in front of the laptop, it did not motivate me at all to learn” (Irina). Diana, who herself wants to become a teacher, expressed admiration for her school and teachers for their response to moving online, and keeping it moving: Of course, teachers as others have to adapt to these new conditions. It has also enlightened the problem of the lack of knowledge and ability to use digital tools. However, I still admire the rapidity at which almost everyone adapted to it and learned how to deal with it! By the time students graduated, they have been studying remotely on and off for almost a year and a half, and they, therefore, had the opportunity to get more used to it. An interesting aspect was the comparison between those who graduated in 2020 and 2021. Those graduating in 2020 switched to remote mode a few months before exams and finishing school, while those graduating in 2021 have studied remotely with short periods of onsite attendance for over a year by then.

Implications of the Covid-19 Pandemic on High School Graduates    153 We could not imagine that we will be in the very same situation for our own 12th grade, that we will have it also mainly online. However, I still think that it was worse for those who had to switch to online teaching at the end of their 12th grade. (Arturs) Remote learning also made a difference in terms of how students study, which proved challenging for some: I am better in sciences, maybe I am not so good in languages, in Latvian. I don’t like to write essays, but we have to write them a lot. Yes, I have the feeling that now we have to write more than before, which is a challenge for me. I definitely prefer to respond mutually, and this is one of the major differences now, when we have classes online. (Arturs) There are others that emphasize the convenience of remote studies – no need to spend time on commuting, self-paced lessons, ability to sleep longer, and study later in the evening. Most students find remote studies more difficult than onsite learning, but an associated problem is the possible lack of knowledge. Young people are worried about learning outcomes and exams because they feel that the quality of their learning and their knowledge is suffering. Often students note that they receive relatively high grades, but there is no real knowledge behind them because requirements in tests and exams are being lowered. Also, teachers, fearing that their own work quality could be questioned, tend to be more lenient, and less critical in their assessments. Even the content of centralized examination that is taken by all secondary school graduates in the end of the program, in 2020 and 2021 was adjusted to the level and content expectedly covered during the last year. In this way, the results are comparable across schools and individuals, as they always are, but does not allow to estimate the actual knowledge level compared to pre-pandemic time. Ministry of Education and Science of Latvia estimates that in the 2020–2021 academic year, pupils have learned only between 60% (in younger grades) and 80% (in older grades) of content compared to a standard pre-pandemic year. The opinion expressed by our respondents is indeed grounded. The education system will take long to catch up and bring young people’s knowledge to the standard pre-pandemic level. For HEIs, this will present a challenge to see those new student cohorts entering with lower expertise and weaker skills. The lack of motivation commonly emerges in graduate reflections. It is hard to concentrate and motivate myself to do something. Also, I don’t feel confident about my knowledge, and I am very nervous about how good or bad my exam results will be because I don’t feel ready to write any exams. (Inga). The young people very directly relate it to the isolation at home and lack of real-time communication. “I’m afraid this will have a very bad impact on my

154    Zane Varpina et al. grades and future. It is hard not seeing friends. It makes me less happy, less motivated” (Ilze). Daniela and Visvizi (2021) note that everyone needs “social contact, opportunities to meet and build friendships, and remote relationships can affect people’s psycho-emotional state.” Lack of real-life communication with friends is unsurprisingly a very common problem, which causes additional stress and frustration for the youngsters. “I’m fed up. I want society, to meet other people, my friends and most importantly – my beautiful, beloved girlfriend,” Victor mentions. The importance of this aspect in adolescents’ life should not be underestimated, the age when friends and “gang” commonly play even more important role than family (Rogers, Ha, Ockey, 2021). Some students admitted that they did not follow the strict restrictions and met friends. Arturs linked these meetings not only to face-to-face communications but also joined activities and hobbies they continued to engage in during the pandemic: I would be lying if I would say that I don’t meet my friends. We try not to break too much the rules, but it is how it is …. We prefer to meet each other outside, then we talk and do some sports. I used to play basketball, so I prefer to play it still in my spare time. When asked about the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on their lives, students often mentioned that they felt as if life was going by and that opportunities were being lost that would never happen again. “I think this all is very unfortunate. Many opportunities have been thrown away because of Covid-19,” Daiga explains. They regret the situation has paused or slowed down their life which in the dynamic teenage years feels especially unfortunate: “Our lives stopped, that’s sad” (Ance). The lost opportunities emerge as one of the commonly mentioned reflections, as Dainis puts it: It has definitely changed my life because I have lost a lot of good opportunities for international experiences as well as the ones here in Latvia that could help in my future studies. At the same time, students express a very high level of resilience. They recognize the challenging situation, at the same time reflecting that through difficulties it brings out a lot of positivity in field of self-development and character growth. Madara says: “It has been very hard, but at the same time, it has been the best time for character development.” Adolescents evaluate the situation from both positive and negative perspectives, and in fact very commonly find the benefits stronger, like Carlina here: For me personally, this situation has both its pros and cons. Learning at a distance is a time when I am able to test my self-discipline and determination to maintain the same results as in-person learning.

Implications of the Covid-19 Pandemic on High School Graduates    155 This self-development aspect indeed surfaces in conversations with the soonto-be graduates. In the positive context, students commonly mention also new opportunities that would have not become available had the pandemic never come. For example, Rudolfs thinks that “the situation will bring new opportunities in many different areas.” While some other students, like Toms, turn the attention to the personal development perspective as an opportunity: “We should never forget that it is (a) great opportunity to improve yourself.” Some embraced the pandemic as an opportunity to grow. Diana reflected on her experience after graduation. She started playing the piano again: I have returned to piano during pandemic. It is due to the fact, that the time that I spend at home has increased …. Not to say – increased, since now everything takes place at home. Mihails took up running, instead of football: “I run. I have learned to endure longer distances in football, so running is also something hard but rewarding.” Students are looking at the impact of the pandemic beyond themselves also. Yet, another perspective, apparently a matter of high concern for adolescents, is the positive effect the slow down would have on climate: “It is an opportunity to digitalize and slow down climate change” as “… changes force us to think, act differently …” (Ilona). This was already recognized by students early in the pandemic: Traffic is very limited. Air pollution has decreased …. And in Venice the water has clearer …. You can even see fish. The fact that there are less flights …. So there are some good and some bad points. (Emilija)

4.2. Stress and Uncertainty High levels of stress can have a negative effect on overall academic performance. At the same time, moderate levels of daily controlled stress can even be healthy in form of, for example, enhanced memory (Hupbach & Fieman, 2012) and better human performance (Driskell & Salas, 2013). HEIs welcoming students benefit from awareness of the students’ recent stress levels, which may also be indicators of how students will cope and adjust not only to higher education but hybrid or online higher education, which is the new reality for many. The majority of young people surveyed (72%) had a moderate level of stress, 9% had a low level of stress, and almost a fifth (19%) of adolescents surveyed perceived their life associated with high levels of stress, according to reported PSS measurements (Fig. 2), which is alarming. Rather unfortunately no data from previous years are available, hence results are benchmarked against commonly used PSS division of low, moderate, and high stress. Grade 12 students have a higher level of stress than grade 11 students (Fig. 2), which can be explained by final exams and expected changes in their lives. It is

156    Zane Varpina et al.

Number of respondents

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

Perceived Stress Score

Fig. 2.  The Perceived Stress Scores Among Survey Respondents. Source: Author calculations, based on survey data.Note: PSS scores 0–13 are considered low stress; 14–26 are moderate stress, and 27–40 are high perceived stress. interesting that high levels of stress are less common among students of minority (primarily Russian) secondary schools than among young people in Latvian schools. This may be explained by a different mentality; however, the data do not allow to explain reasons for the difference. Regarding gender differences in the perception of stress, the results confirm the results of several other previous studies in the field of psychology that girls are more exposed and susceptible to high levels of stress compared to their male peers. One explanation could be the different gender-specific stress management strategies (Fig. 3). These results were confirmed in the one-to-one interviews, hearing people speak about their experiences. Paula tells that “it is difficult to deal with emotions and stress,” while Katrina confesses that “COVID increased my mental health problems.” Overall, it is not, of course, a new finding. Mental health decline has been a widely recognized consequence of Covid-19 affected school closures and lockdowns. The emotional state of youngsters differs radically. Some young people feel depressed and anxious about their own and others’ mental health, express anger at the situation, and feel out of control over life and events. Their feelings are expressed as “everything will become still worse” (Inga), “horror and madness”

78%

13%

9% 8% low

71% 75%

70%

moderate 11th grade

12th grade

22%

high

5%

24%

15%

low

10% moderate female

high

male

Fig. 3.  Perceived Stress by Grade (a) and Gender (b), 2021. Source: Author calculations, based on survey data.

Implications of the Covid-19 Pandemic on High School Graduates    157 (Victor) and “I’m shocked!” (Rebeka). The scale of their dissatisfaction with the Covid-19 situation is wide too: from extreme “All bad!” (Peter) to rather soft “(I’m) not too worried, (it is) mildly annoying …” (Irina). At the same time, a surprisingly large number of respondents show a high level of resilience and cognitive flexibility. They accept the situation, learn to live with it, they are sure that “everything will be fine” as a result. Often, the attitude similar to Anna is expressed: “Well, for me, life goes on without any special problems.” In general, young adolescents are easier to adapt to new situations than older individuals, and this psychological quality helps them to live through pandemic restrictions. Jekaterina formulates the opinion heard from many adolescents succinctly: Just yesterday I had a breakdown about the thought of things never being the same. But then I realized that of course things won’t be the same, because we as individuals will have grown so much. We will have survived the global pandemic and learned from it. In my opinion, everything happens for a reason. And this pandemic is our chance to adapt to new ways of studying, working etc. This is our opportunity to finally sit down (in our homes preferably) and think about things we haven’t have the chance to think about before, and then we act on them. It will get better, but we have to do something to make it better. (.) Better means you have to learn and find happiness or meaning in everything you do from now on in this new to everyone situation. Young age is the transition time to adulthood, new school, employment, independent living, and is generally associated with high uncertainty. Covid-19 pandemic has escalated the uncertainty to a yet higher level, adding even more unpredictability that is beyond human control. Dace is concerned about future unpredictability: “Many great plans if haven’t disappeared into a thin air have been postponed to an unclear time in the future, which is sad and disappointing in itself ” and continues associating this unsureness with personal motivation: […] one of the worst things people have to experience right now is living in uncertainty. Not that life is ever predictable, but if we lose the spirit of dreaming and setting up plans for the future, we might lose our will to do little daily tasks as well. Another young woman, Inita states that uncertainty may be the reason for low spirits and poor mental wellbeing: “… It is extremely difficult to stay positive in a time with such a vast amount of changes.” Perhaps one of the most telling descriptions of a total transition is from Miks, who was interviewed in September 2021. Miks “could not even imagine the life outside pandemic. It is even hard to reflect how the life was before the pandemic.” Thus, while students saw opportunities and a positive impact of the pandemic, it was undeniably a big change bringing stress and different emotions in their lives. The disbelief about

158    Zane Varpina et al. still studying remotely in 2021 is shared by students. Looking back at interviews at the beginning of the pandemic – this is not surprising. In April 2020, students before graduation, did not see the pandemic continuing for years but for months. Aleksandrs said in April 2020: “I was thinking that it would be good that about the autumn the things will get back to the usual.” All in all, uncertainty about the future and difficulty planning ahead are also commonly mentioned by young people. Some, like Adeline in April 2020, describe uncertainty that seems to be overwhelming: Now I am confused about Riga, I don’t know even when our school here will end. It is not known yet whether this distant learning will be successful. If not, we’ll have to learn during the summer. And there will be some changes as for the entrance exams. I hope that I will manage to do it all until August and to move to Riga. Now I have to finish the school. At the same time, like in interviews the years before the pandemic, uncertainty is present in the narrative high school graduates use. For example, Miks talked about choosing his path “I thought I would like to have and it was very hard to choose the right one.” What is surprising is that students did not describe uncertainty even. Compared to interviews with previous years, students’ plans were less pronounced. Yet, the uncertainty was not always directly linked to the pandemic either. Instead, there is a sense of being without a clear direction. Katrina, started her studies a month before the interview. She reflected: Actually, during the entire secondary school I did not know what I would like to study, and even in the summer. I submitted documents to three different fields, but I was admitted in sociology. However, by now I am not sure that it is something I would like to pursue. If I would have to apply for another time, I would go to study medicine. These remarks are closely linked to changes in how time and the passing of time changed during the last two years for many. For some when there was not so much going on during lockdowns, times of isolation, and quarantines, perception of time was slow. They would have described it as time is passing slowly but looking back they wondered how a year went by so quickly. For others, on the other hand, time went by quickly. There was among participants a divide too, some saw the positives and opportunities in the restrictions and were motivated to grow, and enjoy the life they had. Others retreated and focused on loss.

4.3. Disruptions to Plans Despite the overall turmoil and uncertainty, in Latvia Covid-19 allegedly had little effect on young people’s plans to continue their studies. Yet, because of the

Implications of the Covid-19 Pandemic on High School Graduates    159 pandemic, fewer students went abroad and were less inclined to start a business. Knowing more about the intentions and experiences of higher education clients in such times of change is directly relevant to HEIs that will recruit and welcome these students. In the long run, these experiences may have a long-lasting effect on how education, mobility, and knowledge are perceived and sought by students. After graduating from high school, 82% of young people plan to continue their studies, a small number (2%) plan to start working, while the rest of the young people had not yet decided what to do. Most of the students plan to continue their studies in Latvia, however, a quarter plan to go abroad to study. No significant differences have been observed between Latvian and minority school leavers in terms of their willingness to study abroad. Popular destinations for people who plan to study abroad include the UK, Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Russia, and Germany. About a third of those who plan to study abroad had not yet decided exactly in which country they plan to continue their studies (Fig. 4). The graduates were asked to reflect on how they thought the pandemic has affected their future plans (Fig. 5). Students indicate they are less likely are going to live abroad in the next year, less likely to start a business and start working, but plans to continue studies have not been affected. Interestingly though, the graduates express opposite opinions – while 89% of respondents said that pandemic

have not decided yet other

12% 4%

study work

82% 2%

Fig. 4.  What Do You Plan To Do in the Next 12 Months After Graduating School? Source: Author calculations, based on survey data. 70% 52%

45%

44%

41% 33%

32% 11%

Going to live abroad

14% 16%

Study in higher education Less likely

26%

16%

Start own enterprise

More likely

Start working for pay

The same

Fig. 5.  How Has Covid-19 Pandemic Affected Your Plans for the Following Year? Source: Author calculations, based on survey data.

160    Zane Varpina et al. had a negative or no effect on going abroad (for studies or work, or any other reason), a minor 11% of respondents expressed it would increase the likelihood. Arturs pointed out that although he and his classmates considered going abroad, but the pandemic influenced not only his decision but also how much he knows about others’ plans. I have thought about that. I have several classmates, who have also this idea in mind and who are really considering the option to study abroad. Well, I don’t know how many of them will really do so, but this topic appears from time to time …. But on the other hand – it is pandemic by now …. It changes it all. We can only guess or expect but to be honest, we cannot predict at all the future. Even at the beginning of the pandemic (April 2020), students reflected on what this means for studying abroad. Emilija said: “In general, those who would like to study in universities from abroad, they all are very stressed and wondering how that will happen.” But further into crisis year, the one who responded positively to going aboard option and enterprise establishment are likely to be the ones with the growth mindset that saw a lot of opportunities the pandemic has brought, as opposed to Olafs who thinks that “It (Covid-19) ruined a lot of my plans about studying abroad this year.” From the interviews, while most students thought about creating their own enterprise the consensus is not now, not yet. Katrina explained: Maybe, in some 10–15 years I could reflect about it, once I will have gained experience, when I would have discovered how it works. How all it works. But I have actually no clue of what I could do in the future. I am even considering quitting university. Another reason why interviewees do not opt to start an enterprise is stress: “I am not sure whether I will run an enterprise since it is very challenging in Latvia, the market is small and you have to work very hard” (Irina), and Arturs “I think that I would not like to encounter the stress one has while running an enterprise.”

5. Discussion and Conclusions This chapter looked at senior pupils in high schools right before their graduation with the aim to scrutinize how Covid-19 pandemic affected their lives with regard to education and their career plans for the closest years. Schools moving online was one of the biggest changes that students encountered in their final years of high school due to the pandemic. Understanding how they experienced remote studies, and the impact of online studies can help HEIs welcome some of these students to adjust expectations and methods and maximize the learning of this cohort. Beyond this cohort, students’ reflections may help higher educators tailor the university experience for future cohorts

Implications of the Covid-19 Pandemic on High School Graduates    161 experiencing change and welcoming cohorts studying in what may be “the new normal.” As HEIs started to welcome a new, digital native generation who have no memories from before the Internet (Gen-Z) in their undergraduate programs, adaptation was already on the way. The extent to which these cohorts embraced remote learning and online, everything may act as a trigger to speed up this transition process for HEIs. This may be easier as those at HEIs, regardless of their previous attitude and experience with remote teaching too had to embrace remote teaching and increasingly digitalized study environments due to the pandemic. The emotional state differs – some young people feel depressed and anxious, express anger, and feel lack of control over life and events. Almost a fifth of young people surveyed are exposed to high levels of stress. Young women are more exposed to high levels of stress than their peers. Pupils worry about lost opportunities, uncertainty about the future, and lack of knowledge, motivation, and communication. What does it mean for HEIs to welcome cohorts of students who are so different from previous cohorts not only in how and what they studied but their stress levels also? For students, who spent the last year and a half in higher-than-average stress, the long-term effects could include mental and physical health challenges. These may manifest during their higher education journey, resulting in a struggle to perform and adjust to university life. The consequences for universities are both financial and structural; adequate support to support students and minimize drop-out rate may be some of the measures to support this cohort. Lack of motivation, lack of communication with friends, uncertainty about the future, and difficulties in planning ahead are often mentioned. Both the lack of knowledge and lack of motivation are issues that HEIs must address when they welcome the new cohorts of students that have acquired secondary education during the pandemic. The implications for admissions, performance, expectations, and mental health reach beyond Covid-19 lockdown periods. However, a relatively large number of respondents see the positive impact of the pandemic, the opportunity to slow down the daily race, reassess their true desires and values, learn to plan time, gain new experience, and use this time for self-development. They accept the situation, learn to live with it, and they are sure that everything will be alright. These skills and coping strategies may be useful for students in other transitions, including that to university life or adjustment to different modes of study. Stress, decreased mobility, instability, worsening of families’ financial situation, and mental health issues link to the issue of fewer applications for HEIs. Indeed predictions at the beginning of the pandemic forecast a drop in enrollments. As the pandemic goes on, enrollment statistics reveal that the drop is significant in the USA, 6.5% fewer students are enrolled in US colleges compared to two years ago (National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, 2022). The drop is even more significant for community colleges. In Europe, a small, self-reported survey found that only in Lithuania was there a drop in domestic student enrollments in the first year of the pandemic, but there has been a drop in international student numbers in many countries (Gaebel & Stoeber, 2021). In Latvia, the number of new entrants to higher education in 2020–2021 dropped after an increase in the previous academic year, and total

162    Zane Varpina et al. enrollments fell to the lowest number in recent history (CSP, 2021). As the still on-going pandemic already had an impact on enrollments, recruiters and HEIs may need to adapt their strategies to increase enrollments. Indeed, these students are now used to studying remotely despite disbelief that the pandemic is still going on and life has not returned to what is used to be. While attitudes to remote studies differ, this has implications for HEIs for the current and potentially further studies. The cohort has the necessary knowledge and experience to study online. This may allow education institutions to shift resources from introducing students to remote learning to developing their e-learning environments and providing skills training for their staff. Additionally, the cohort may see online education less as a novelty or unusual than previous cohorts, allowing institutions to innovate, develop further programs, or distinguish themselves by offering in-person opportunities. Uncertainty about the future emerges as a major theme both in the survey data and interviews. When asked about the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on their lives, students often mention that they feel as if life was going by and opportunities were missed that would never be there again. Most students found remote studies more difficult than face-to-face learning. Young people are worried about learning outcomes and exams because they feel that the quality of learning and their knowledge suffers. Several students have mentioned that they receive high grades, but there is no real knowledge behind them. This reflects previous research (reference mentioned in introduction) and poses a real question to HEIs both in terms of adjusting entrance exams (if any) and tailoring the study process. For the later, the key question is if students can “catch up” with previous cohorts. Failing to support this “catching up” process can lead to higher drop-out rate. Adjusting the curriculum to accommodate lower experience and knowledge on the other hand would ultimately lead to this cohort entering the workforce even after their higher education studies disadvantaged compared to previous cohorts. The long-term implications could include integration and advancement in the labor force, financial wellbeing, health, and even demographic issues such as family planning and migration. These issues reach beyond further studies to life.

Acknowledgment This research was supported by Latvian Council of Science, with funding number lzp-2018/1-0486 and acronym FLPP-2018-1.

References Besser, A., Flett, G. L., & Zeigler-Hill, V. (2020). Adaptability to a sudden transition to online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: Understanding the challenges for students. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 8(2), 85–105.

Implications of the Covid-19 Pandemic on High School Graduates    163 Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behaviour, 24(4), 385–396. National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. (2022, January 13). Covid-19: Stay informed. Retrieved from https://nscresearchcenter.org/stay-informed/. Accessed on January 20, 2022. CSP. (2021). Number of enrolments as well as entrant number has decreased. Press release, Central Statistical Office of Latvia. Retrieved from https://www.csb.gov.lv/en/statistics/ statistics-by-theme/social-conditions/education/search-in-theme/2927-topicalitieshigher-education-school. Accessed on January 20, 2022. Daniela, L., & Visvizi, A. (Eds.). (2021). Introduction: Remote learning as a mode of distance learning. In Remote learning in times of pandemic (pp. 1–9). New York, NY: Routledge. Driskell, J. E., & Salas, E. (Eds.). (2013). Stress and human performance. Mahwah, NJ: Psychology Press. Fegert, J. M., Vitiello, B., Plener, P. L., & Clemens, V. (2020). Challenges and burden of the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic for child and adolescent mental health: A narrative review to highlight clinical and research needs in the acute phase and the long return to normality. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, 14, 1–11. Fredheim, K., & Varpina, Z. (2022). The Covid-19 pandemics’s impact on migrants’ decision to return home to Latvia. In A. Visvizi, O. Troisi, & K. Saeedi (Eds.), Research and Innovation Forum 2022. Cham: Springer International Publishing Gaebel, M., & Stoeber, H. (2021, November 17). The impact of Covid-19 on European higher education. Brussels: European University Association. Retrieved from https:// eua.eu/resources/publications/989:the-impact-of-covid-19-on-european-highereducation.html. Accessed on January 20, 2022. Hupbach, A., & Fieman, R. (2012). Moderate stress enhances immediate and delayed retrieval of educationally relevant material in healthy young men. Behavioral Neuroscience, 126(6), 819. IZM. (2020). Datortehnikas nodrošināšanā skolēniem iesaistās valsts, pašvaldības un privātie partneri. Ministry of Education and Science of Latvia. Retrieved from https://www. izm.gov.lv/lv/jaunums/datortehnikas-nodrosinasana-skoleniem-iesaistas-valstspasvaldibas-un-privatie-partneri?utm_source=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google. com. Accessed on January 20, 2022. Li, X., Tang, X., Wu, H., Wang, M., & Li, L. (2021). COVID-19-related stressors and Chinese adolescents’ adjustment: The moderating role of coping and online learning satisfaction. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, 241. Maqableh, M., & Alia, M. (2021). Evaluation online learning of undergraduate students under lockdown amidst COVID-19 pandemic: The online learning experience and students’ satisfaction. Children and Youth Services Review, 128, 106160. OECD. (2020). Learning remotely when schools close: How well are students and schools prepared? Insights from PISA. OECD Policy Responses to Coronavirus (Covid-19). Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy-responses/learning-remotelywhen-schools-close-how-well-are-students-and-schools-prepared-insights-from-pisa3bfda1f7/ Re:Baltica. (2021). Skola kā loterija. Kā pandēmijā aug plaisa izglītības kvalitātē. Re:Baltica, Baltijas Pētnieciskās Žurnālistikas Centrs. Retrieved from https://rebaltica.lv/ 2021/09/skola-ka-loterija-ka-pandemija-aug-plaisa-izglitibas-kvalitate/. Accessed on January 20, 2022. Rogers, A. A., Ha, T., & Ockey, S. (2021). Adolescents’ perceived socio-emotional impact of COVID-19 and implications for mental health: Results from a US-based mixedmethods study. Journal of Adolescent Health, 68(1), 43–52.

164    Zane Varpina et al. Son, C., Hegde, S., Smith, A., Wang, X., & Sasangohar, F. (2020). Effects of COVID-19 on college students’ mental health in the United States: Interview survey study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(9), e21279. Stokenberga, I. (2008). Humorous personality: Relationship to stress and well-being. Baltic Journal of Psychology, 9, 70–84. Stokenberga, I. (2010). Humora loma stresa pārvarēšanas procesā. Promocijas darbs. Riga: Latvijas Universitāte. UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2022). Education: From disruption to recovery. Retrieved from https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse. Accessed on January 14, 2022. Varpina, Z., & Fredheim, K. (2022). Mobility intentions of Latvian high-school graduates amid Covid-19 pandemic and beyond. In A. Visvizi, O. Troisi, & K. Saeedi (Eds.), Research and Innovation Forum 2022. Cham: Springer International Publishing. Visvizi, A., Daniela, L., & Chen, C. W. (2020). Beyond the ICT- and sustainability hypes: A case for quality education. Computers in Human Behavior, 107, 106304. Walters, T., Simkiss, N. J., Snowden, R. J., & Gray, N. S. (2021). Secondary school students’ perception of the online teaching experience during COVID-19: The impact on mental wellbeing and specific learning difficulties. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(3), 843–860. Wathelet, M., Duhem, S., Vaiva, G., Baubet, T., Habran, E., Veerapa, E., … & D’Hondt, F. (2020). Factors associated with mental health disorders among university students in France confined during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA Network Open, 3(10), e2025591.

Chapter 10

The Pandemic Experience as a New Challenge for Public Czech Universities Miroslav Dopita, Lucie Rohlíková, Andrea Sojková and Vít Zouhar Abstract Prior to 2020, the Czech higher education institutions (HEIs) did not have much experience with distance learning and blended learning. Experience with hybrid teaching was minimal. The Covid-19 pandemic therefore presented the management of public universities in the Czech Republic with a number of new tasks in resolving the crisis situation. It also made the possibilities of distance education and other flexible forms of education significantly more visible. In 2021, a total of 26 public universities joined together in a central development project, in order to discuss the most important issues of distance education and blended learning, the current background for the implementation of flexible forms of education, and also their future plans in this area. In this chapter, the authors present in detail the results of a study on the background of public universities for the implementation of distance education and blended learning, which have become the basis for creating the action plans of individual institutions. The results of the analysis showed, among other things online supported education is important, especially in emergency situations. Keywords: HEIs; Covid-19; distance education; remote learning; e-learning; the Czech Republic

1. Introduction Distance education and e-learning have come to the forefront of interest worldwide in the context of the global Covid-19 pandemic. According to UNESCO, Moving Higher Education Beyond Covid-19: Innovative and Technology-Enhanced Approaches to Teaching and Learning, 165–193 Copyright © 2023 by Miroslav Dopita, Lucie Rohlíková, Andrea Sojková and Vít Zouhar Published under exclusive licence by Emerald Publishing Limited doi:10.1108/978-1-80382-517-520231010

166    Miroslav Dopita et al. the pandemic affected more than 155 million students, with more than 19 states closing schools altogether, and switching to distance learning (UNESCO, 2021). Students were forced to abandon traditional methods of acquiring knowledge and developing their skills. In 2021, more than 37% of students enrolled in online study programmes in the United States declared that, given the Covid-19 pandemic, online education was their only option (Best Colleges, 2021). Pandemic distance learning may have been based on many years of experience and practice developed through many previous researches on the use of technology in digitally supported education (e.g., Armakolas, Panagiotakopoulos, & Karatrantou, 2018; Arnold & Sangrà, 2018, Chivu, Orzan, & Popa, 2019, Richards, Stevens, Silver, & Metts, 2019, González-Zamar, Abad-Segura, LópezMeneses, & Gómez-Galán, 2020), and contributed to the fulfilment of the vision of open and distance learning (UNESCO, 2002, pp. 35–39, 54, 87–88). However, emergency distance learning had its distinct specifics of education implemented in the unusual context of a new social situation. Research conducted before the pandemic (e.g., Bettinger, Fox, Loeb, & Taylor, 2017, Kuznyak, 2017, etc.) significantly helped the rapid transition to distance learning – but did not anticipate the specifics of emergency distance learning. Therefore, all publications that already include a view of distance education, including pandemic experience, are valuable, with regard to the technical teaching tools used by the university itself (Malanga, Bernardes, Borini, Pereira, & Rossetto, 2022), accredited forms of teaching study programmes (e.g., Stukalo & Dluhopolskyi, 2020), for teaching practical skills (e.g., Mazur, Pantsyreva, & Prokopchuk, 2021; Dulohery, Scully, Longhurst, Stone, & Campbell, 2021), organization of digitally supported higher education when needed (e.g., Bokayev, Torebekova, Abdykalikova, & Davletbayeva, 2021; Klapkiv & Dluhopolska, 2020; Navickiene˙, Droessiger, Valantinate˙, Trinku¯nas, & Jaras, 2021), the need to prepare university teachers for online teaching (e.g., Richards et al., 2019; Murtonen et al., 2019; Johnson, Veletsianos, & Seaman, 2020; Daniela & Visvizi, 2021), and the specifics of supporting students’ academic integrity in online teaching (Richards, Stevens, Silver, & Campbell, 2020), as well as the use of online teaching for the implementation of virtual mobility (e.g., Leek & Rojek, 2021). Partial attention is focused on the online education of students with special needs (e.g., Tóthová & Sedlácˇková, 2021), and would deserve more attention. The development of online courses at universities also provides new opportunities for lifelong learning and sustainable development in various areas of life (Daniela & Visvizi, 2021; Hueske, Aggestam Pontoppidan, & Iosif-Lazar, 2022). The situation is monitored with regard to the strategic focus of universities on digitally supported education, which showed the direction, at the individual, institutional, but especially systemic level (Laufer et al., 2021; Johnson, Roberto, & Rauhaus, 2021), and that it is necessary to move toward university co-operation, the use of collaborative learning, and also that its internationalization can support the elimination of inequalities in education and thereby partially transform higher education. However, with these changes, there are also challenges for universities in the form of synchronous/asynchronous learning tool integration,

The Pandemic Experience as a New Challenge for Public Czech    167 access to technology, faculty and student online competence, academic dishonesty, and privacy & confidentiality (Turnbull, Chugh, & Luck, 2021). Responsibility for the strategy of digital support for teaching and learning in higher education was followed by the study “Digitally Enhanced Learning and Teaching in European Higher Education Institutions” (Gaebel, Zhang, Stoeber, & Morrisroe, 2021, pp. 37–38), which identified responsibility sharing between central units and faculties at the European University Association (EUA) level as being 48%. The responsibility at the level of central units within the EUA research lies with 45% of the surveyed institutions. The remaining 7% of EUA research universities have transferred responsibility for the digitally supported education strategy to faculties and departments. This group also includes the Czech Republic, where 11 public and 2 private universities participated in the research, which indicates a high level of decentralization, with 23% of these units having this responsibility; in 2014, the Czech Republic stated 15%, compared to other countries represented in the research. For comparison, in this group of countries, the Czech Republic appears together with Georgia, which reached 30%. Universities in the Czech Republic stated that they have a strategy of digital support for education in 31%, i.e., 4 out of 13 universities. In the case strategy digitally enhanced learning and teaching of European universities, a study (Gaebel et al., 2021, pp. 48–49) found that the lack of human resources came first (51%), the lack of external funding opportunities (40%), the difficulty of devising a common approach for the whole institutions, which would be positive in terms of “strategy and proactive employee and student participation” (36%), and lack of employee motivation was supported by more than a third (34%) of institutions. In Czech universities, 39% were inclined to state the shortcomings in the national regulation of digital education, i.e., in the rules for the application of digital education. These data create challenges in terms of focus and institutional planning of digitally supported learning and teaching, influenced by different disciplinary and departmental cultures, as well as the approaches of individual teachers. The research, which aimed to find out how all public universities in the Czech Republic develop digitally supported education (e-learning) based on the goals defined in the strategic documents of universities, what technical equipment, methodological support, and economic support, tried to fulfil this challenge for the provision of higher education. The objective of this chapter is two-fold, i.e., to offer an overview of the situation in the area of distance, blended and online learning in HEIs in the Czech Republic, and to enable comparisons between and among universities. The chapter introduces the methodology of the research and presents results in such categories: ⦁⦁ University strategies in the field of distance/online/blended learning/digitally

supported education

⦁⦁ Material provision of universities in the field of distance/online/blended learning/

digitally supported education

⦁⦁ Organizational support of universities in the field of distance/online/blended

learning/digitally supported education

168    Miroslav Dopita et al. ⦁⦁ Economic support of universities in the field of distance/online/blended learning/

digitally supported education

⦁⦁ Obstacles to the implementation of distance/online/blended learning/digitally

supported education at universities.

2. Methodology To obtain data from individual universities, a questionnaire inspired by the structure of Paulsen’s (2002) research was prepared, the sub-items of which were based on the following clusters of research questions: ⦁⦁ Does the university base its activities in the field of distance education and

e-learning on specific internal strategic documents? At the university or individual faculty level? ⦁⦁ What technical background does the school have in terms of hardware, software, Learning Management System (LMS), etc.? Does the school use its own systems, open source, or paid services? ⦁⦁ What technical and methodological support in the field of distance education and e-learning does the university provide to teachers and students? How available is individual support? Are specifically targeted trainings implemented? ⦁⦁ From what sources does the university finance the development of distance education and e-learning? Does the university rely only on project resources in this area, or does it invest other resources, obtain resources from sponsors, etc.? The research tool (electronic questionnaire) was commented on mostly by the universities included in the project. The final form of the data collection tool divided the questions into five groups; namely (1) University strategy in the field of distance/online/blended learning/digitally supported education, (2) Material provision of universities in the field of distance/online/blended learning/digitally supported education, (3) Organizational support of universities in the field of distance/online/blended learning/digitally supported education, (4) Economic provision of universities in the field of distance/online/blended learning/digitally supported education, (5) Obstacles to implementation distance/online/blended learning/digitally supported education at universities. If the terms “distance”/“online”/“blended learning”/“digitally supported learning” are mentioned in the text, it is always a synchronous or asynchronous use of online teaching tools without a direct link to full-time/part-time/ distance-learning form of accredited study programmes, unless explicitly stated otherwise. At the same time, the terms “distance” and “online” are understood as synonyms, as well as the terms “blended learning” and “digitally supported education,” in which only one of them is always mentioned in the text for reading fluency. Data collection took place in April and May 2021. One completed questionnaire was required for each public university involved. The questionnaire was

The Pandemic Experience as a New Challenge for Public Czech    169 filled in at individual universities by contact persons on the basis of a discussion carried out within individual institutions. The return was 100%. The deadline for obtaining answers from all of the participating universities was extended by almost a month. The universities were reminded several times about the completion of the questionnaire. Achieving 100% return is very valuable, because the overall results provide a comprehensive picture of the state of the background for the implementation of distance education and blended learning at public universities in the Czech Republic.

3. Results The obtained results demonstrate the state and trends of Czech public universities in the field of distance/online/blended learning/digitally supported education. The research survey was exhaustive, with the participation of all 26 public universities, both university colleges and technical and artistic colleges. For the analysis of data, the document works with absolute frequencies, as it is a statement of 26 Czech public universities, and their conversion to relative frequencies is possible, and at the same time does not distort the situation by high percentage values, which represent low absolute frequencies.

3.1. University Strategies in the Field of Distance/Online/Blended Learning/Digitally Supported Education The first part of the questionnaire focused on the strategy of universities in their approach to distance education. The individual universities had to express the degree of the possibility of implementing distance education in higher education on a scale from 0% to 100%. According to the respondents, distance education

18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Theorecal subjects

0

1

0

1

7

17

Praccal subjects

1

8

8

5

2

2

Studios, test rooms, laboratories

11

8

4

2

1

0

Graph 1.  Implementation of Online-Supported Education in Teaching.

170    Miroslav Dopita et al. mostly allows the study of theoretical subjects, where the possibility of 100% was indicated by two thirds of universities. On the contrary, for teaching in studios, testing rooms or laboratories, the number of universities with the decreasing percentage of the possibility of implementing the online form of this teaching increased, and almost half of the universities chose the 0% option for this variant. For practical subjects, the options of 20% and 40% were most often chosen for the implementation of online teaching. The following graph, No. 1, shows the situation in more detail. In the same way, universities also expressed the degree of the possibility of implementing digitally supported education in teaching, depending on the type of study subjects. Digitally supported education, according to the answers of universities, allows the study of theoretical subjects the most, as in the previous case, where the possibility of 100% was also indicated by two thirds of universities. However, a smaller proportion of universities already indicated the possibility of 80%, and two universities indicated 0%. For practical subjects, the option of 40% was most often chosen for the implementation of blended learning. For teaching in studios, testing rooms, or laboratories, the distribution of answers is similar to the previous case for the implementation of online education of this teaching, but here, a smaller number of universities chose the 0% variant. The following graph, No. 2, shows the situation in more detail. The concept of the development of distance/digitally supported education is in most cases included in the strategy of the university as a whole, while only in one case this issue is addressed at the faculty level. More precisely, a total of 20 universities have had this issue included in the strategy of universities as a whole since 2021 for combined and distance forms of study. The inclusion of this

18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Theorecal subjects

2

0

0

3

4

17

Praccal subjects

4

3

8

5

3

3

Studios, test rooms, laboratories

8

9

4

1

3

1

Graph 2.  Implementation of Blended Learning-Supported Education in Teaching.

The Pandemic Experience as a New Challenge for Public Czech    171 strategy from 2022 was then declared by 23 universities for all forms of study. Only two universities stated that it did not include this issue in its strategy in any of the mentioned periods and types of study. The following graph, No. 3, shows the situation in more detail. Most universities centrally monitor student feedback on the implementation of distance learning. Another four universities then address this issue at the level of individual faculties, and only one university does not implement it. The following graph, No. 4, shows the situation in more detail. The approach of individual universities to centrally set rules for the preparation of supporting materials for teaching in the online environment is varied. A total of six universities have this anchored centrally, while at eight other universities these rules are being prepared, and seven universities have not set them, whereas at the remaining five universities, this is solved at the level of individual faculties. Graphically, this is shown in the following graph, No. 5.

25 20 15 10 5 0 University Strategy

It is not a University Strategy

Faculty Strategy

Combined and distance forms of study since 2021

20

5

1

All forms of study since 2022

23

2

1

Graph 3.  Concept of the Development of Online Supported Education. 100% 90%

4; faculty level

80%

1; is not monitored

70% 60% 50% 40% 30%

21; university level

20% 10% 0%

Graph 4.  Monitoring Student Feedback Regarding Online Education.

172    Miroslav Dopita et al. 100% 90%

7 No rules

80% 70%

5 Faculty rules

60% 50%

8 Preparaon rules

40% 30% 20%

6 University rules

10% 0%

Graph 5.  Existence of Central Rules for Preparing Supporting Materials for Online Teaching. Another question was whether the university in the distance learning environment has centrally set rules for the length of teaching, depending on its type. Universities most often stated that they do not have these rules set centrally for online synchronous teaching, asynchronous audio/video recordings of teaching, or for the ratio of synchronous and asynchronous teaching. Furthermore, the universities stated to a similar extent that they prepare these rules for all the mentioned types of teaching, or they are solved at the faculty level. The situation is shown in more detail in the following graph, No. 6. Two universities have already set these rules centrally for online synchronous teaching, whereas one university has set them for asynchronous video/audio recording of teaching. Universities were also asked whether they have centrally set rules (methodologies, manuals, or instructions) focused on a combination of synchronous (e.g., 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

Online synchronous teaching University rules

Asynchronous teaching records No rules

Preparaon rules

Combinaon of synchronous and asynchronous teaching Faculty rules

Graph 6.  Existence of Centrally Prepared Rules for Online Environments for the Length of Teaching.

The Pandemic Experience as a New Challenge for Public Czech    173 MS Teams) and asynchronous tools (e.g., LMS Moodle) for the implementation of distance education. Most universities stated that yes, at three schools this is an issue addressed at the faculties, at five these rules are being prepared, and at two universities these rules are already integrated in the LMS itself. Graphically, this is shown in the following Graph 7. 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40%

7 No rules 3 Faculty rules 2; Integrated in LMS 5 Preparaon rules

30% 20% 10%

9 University rules

0%

Graph 7.  Existence of Centrally Prepared Rules Aimed at a Combination of Synchronous and Asynchronous Teaching Tools. In the next part of the questionnaire, universities had to indicate, on a percentage scale from 0% to 100%, what importance they attach to online education for 10 selected activities, and they also had the opportunity to supplement their own activity. For clarity, the individual activities were divided into the following two graphs: Nos. 8 and 9. The greatest importance for universities is the provision of online teaching in case of emergencies, where 21 universities indicated the variant 100%. A total of 4 universities used the opportunity to choose another activity, where they stated the following: “Priorities in the above-mentioned areas also differ in relation to the faculty, and therefore the fields. For those with a smaller share of practical training, more consideration is given to these forms. Teaching staff in these tools is preferred in a completely online form.” attributed importance 100% “Staff training for video recording and streaming artworks.” attributed importance 60% “We are working on a methodology, or rather a recommendation for partial problems of distance education. Theoretical teaching takes place only online, and

174    Miroslav Dopita et al. 25

20

15

10

5

0

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Ensuring online teaching for exceponal cases/situaons The creaon of hybrid forms of teaching Teaching in full-me form SP Teaching in part-me form SP Teaching in distance form SP Teaching in Lifelong-Learning courses

Graph 8.  Attributed Importance of Online-Supported Education in Activities (Teaching). so far, we haven’t worked with blended learning models. Progress is in technology courses.” attributed importance 40% “Preparatory courses for entrance exams.” attributed importance 20% Lastly in this chapter, we discovered whether universities plan to implement online education in foreign language study programmes, depending on other specifics. Most universities plan to implement online education for students in accredited foreign language study programmes, for foreign language subjects included in study programme plans, for foreign students in mobility, and also for virtual mobility. For lifelong learning programmes, the approach to the implementation of online education in foreign languages is more evenly distributed; their implementation is planned by 15 universities, while the remaining 11 universities do not plan implementation at all. The following graph, No. 10, shows the situation again in summary.

The Pandemic Experience as a New Challenge for Public Czech    175 12

10

8

6

4

2

0

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Employee educaon in the field of preparing synchronous online teaching Employee educaon in the field of preparing asynchronous online teaching Employee educaon in the field of synchronous online tesng Employee educaon in the field of asynchronous online tesng

Graph 9.  Attributed Importance of Online-Supported Education in Activities (Employee Education). Here, too, universities had the opportunity to list another area of activity in which they plan to implement online teaching in study programmes in foreign languages. This opportunity was taken advantage of by three universities, which introduced preparatory courses for entrance exams, a university of the third age, and digitally supported seminars for Master’s degree students, prepared by a group of doctoral students. Universities also had the opportunity to add any comments to the questionnaire items related to the strategy. Almost a third of them took advantage of this opportunity: “In general, theoretical subjects can be taught one hundred percent by distance learning; we have systems set up that make all of this possible, but not all teachers at the university are willing to teach them, so we do not have one hundred percent real distance learning. We fill in the value, which we understand as a combination of all factors - we have systems, we have the opportunity, but we have only a partial willingness of teachers, etc. The estimate is given at the lower end of the interval.” “Material security.” “The study of music, especially solo playing, allows the use of maximum individual consultations, which is not possible with the performing arts, which have the nature of teamwork (even most technical disciplines, such as voice and movement & dance training require contact with partners).

176    Miroslav Dopita et al. 0

5

10

15

20

25

For students in accredited foreign language SP For foreign language subjects included in study programmes For students from abroad within the Mobility scheme For virtual Mobility of students In Lifelong-Learning programmes Others Yes

No

Graph 10.  University Plans for the Implementation of Online Education in Foreign Language Study Programmes. Students of some music study programmes are completely dependent on the possibility of training directly at the faculty (unavailability of instruments such as organs, historical instruments, percussion instruments, etc.). The university does not have study programmes with distance learning (only full time and part - time).” “A large proportion of technological items (workshops) that cannot be implemented online or in the future.” “For questions 2 and 3 – implementation of practical training – 40% was marked, however, the truth is that in many subjects the teaching was implemented completely, but it meant large interventions in the course of practical training which, in the long run, are not desirable. According to the approved strategic plan of the university from 2021, online education in all forms of study should be developed as early as 2021, but due to the questions posed in this way, this cannot be stated in question No. 4.” “Concerns the whole questionnaire: It must be objectively acknowledged that the Covid-19 pandemic has a significant impact on the results. Mass online teaching forced by this has greatly shifted the situation in this area.” Additional information to question 7. “Does the university have centrally established rules for the preparation of supporting materials for teaching in the environment of distance/online/digitally supported education?” Our answer was YES, but the complete answer is: Yes. – Centrally, the creation of Teams, based on data from KOS, subjects in Moodle. Within Rector’s order 21/2020, it was stipulated that Moodle + Teams were used as a matter of priority. “Practical training takes place in intensive blocks (release of university closures). Theoretical teaching takes place only online – teachers do not yet lean towards another type of teaching. This is a classic distance lecturing. In the next half of the academic year, however, we are planning pilot ‘blended learning’ courses: awareness of legislation, production competencies, occupational safety at selected workplaces, a seminar on art in public spaces, and the like.”

The Pandemic Experience as a New Challenge for Public Czech    177 “Strategies to support distance learning must always be compared with the accreditation requirements of the study programme.”

3.2. Material Provision of Universities in the Field of Distance/ Online/Blended Learning/Digitally Supported Education The second part of the questionnaire focused on the material provision of distance learning. The answers of the universities show that 14 universities use one information system as the primary one; the open source system was the most frequently chosen from the offered variants, and the cloud system was the least. In general, universities most often choose combinations of offered variants of systems, at two universities this solution is left to the faculties themselves. A more detailed use of individual systems is shown in the following graph, No. 11. When choosing the share of the tool by which the university supports the use of LMS for distance learning on a scale from 0% to 100%, the most, 100%, was marked for Moodle, and then for MS Teams, on the contrary, the highest number of 0% was reported by universities for the NEO tool. Among the tools falling into the category of other universities, Zoom and Google tools (Meet, Classroom, and Workspace) were most often mentioned. A detailed breakdown of the individual percentages for all instruments is given in Graph 12 below. The following question asked what other systems, or tools, is/are linked at a given college primarily/predominantly used by the LMS. This is most often the study information system and e-mail. On the contrary, it is the least connected with proctoring, library catalogue, and e-resources, with which, however, it is at least partially connected at some universities. The detailed distribution of answers between individual systems/tools is shown in the following graph, No. 13.

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Own (on site) soluons Total

3

Commercial LMS Open source on own systems on own installaons installaons 5

6

Cloud LMS

Combinaons of At faculty level the previous

1

Graph 11.  Primary Used Solutions for Distance Learning.

9

2

178    Miroslav Dopita et al. 30

25

20

50% 100%

20%

20%

20% 10%

20%

80% 60% 50% 30%

100%

100%

10%

100%

10%

20% 10%

15

50% 10

40%

0%

90% 0%

70%

Own LMS created by university

Moodle

0%

50%

20%

30% 20%

0% 0

0%

80%

30% 5

0%

0% Blackboard

MS Teams

NEO

UNIFOR

Others

Graph 12.  Share of Support for the Given LMS Tools. 0

5

10

15

20

Study informa on system Email Tools for online verifica on of knowledge Tools for direct, synchronous teaching An -plagiarism system Teacher calendar Student calendar Proctoring E-source library Library catalogue Yes

No

Par al

Graph 13.  Connection of Primary Used LMS with Other Tools.

25

30

The Pandemic Experience as a New Challenge for Public Czech    179 On a scale from 0% to 100%, universities also indicated the percentage to which each tool is used in combination with LMS for direct synchronous teaching, knowledge verification, and online contact. The most common for universities here were MS Teams, then Zoom and Google Meet, while the least used tools were Webex and Google Classroom. Own information systems were mentioned twice as other used systems. A detailed breakdown of the individual percentages for all instruments is shown in Graph 14 below. All but one of the universities provide technical support for the preparation of multimedia teaching, and most schools also provide methodological support for the preparation of multimedia teaching, and also provide software/freeware licenses for the creation of multimedia teaching materials. The following graph, 15, summarizes the situation. In this part of the questionnaire, universities also had the opportunity to add any comments to the questionnaire items related to material security. Three of them took advantage of this opportunity: “Given that one of the essential points of the general principles for the implementation of teaching in higher education in an alternative way, it is recommended to use the LMS Moodle (e-learning) and MS Teams university systems for the implementation of distance learning, and not to burden students with other teaching support systems (if the use of another system is not a significant reason related to the nature of the course), an online course ‘Basics of e-learning for teachers’ was prepared for teachers, which in addition to introducing the basic principles of online education, contains specific instructions on 0

5

10

15

20

25

Study informa on system Email Tools for online verifica on of knowledge Tools for direct, synchronous teaching An -plagiarism system Teacher calendar Student calendar Proctoring E-source library Library catalogue Yes

No

Par al

Graph 14.  Share of Tools Used in Direct Time-Synchronous Teaching, Verified Knowledge, and Online Contact in Combination with LMS.

30

180    Miroslav Dopita et al. 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Technical support for preparing mul media teaching

Number of licenses for so ware/freeware for crea ng mul media teaching materials

Methodological support for preparing mul media teaching

Yes

25

19

20

No

1

7

6

Graph 15.  Provision of Support for the Implementation of Multimedia Online Teaching. how to best use LMS Moodle to prepare own online courses, how to create these courses, and how to make full use of LMS Moodle features to enrich teaching.” “Question 15 – The answers are valid for a minimum of what is at all faculties, however there may be additional interconnections on some components. Question 16 – other components are used on some components - Skype, Google Meet, webex, etc. The answers are related to the central support of the systems. Addition information to question 17 ⦁⦁ technical support for the preparation of multimedia teaching - at the cen-

tral level, there is support with basic training, creation of instructions, and solution of technical problems. Other trainings are also taking place at the faculties. ⦁⦁ Number of software/freeware licenses for the creation of multimedia teaching materials - at the central level, it was evaluated that we would arrange there only commercial tools, these being Adobe products. ⦁⦁ Methodical support for the preparation of multimedia teaching - creation of instructions, help, links to e-learning content.” “Unfortunately, there is no meaningful presentation of the benefits of multimedia teaching yet. We are just getting started.”

3.3. Organizational Support of Universities in the Field of Distance/ Online/Blended Learning/Digitally Supported Education When asked whether there is a central schedule for deploying content-filled courses in the LMS environment before the beginning of the semester, only 5

The Pandemic Experience as a New Challenge for Public Czech    181 universities answered in the affirmative, another 10 answered in the negative, and the remaining 11 leave this to the individual faculties. Graphically, the situation is shown in the following graph, No. 16. Most universities offer some form of training or seminars for teachers to support competencies for working in a primary/predominant LMS environment. One university does not offer any form in the questionnaire of the mentioned trainings. Among the most frequently selected forms was the provision of training to get acquainted with the functionality of the LMS and the creation of course content, the least for universities was the training for online oral examinations. The offer of individual trainings is shown in more detail in the following graph, No. 17. Another question asked how the university provides support for users (teachers, external teachers, lifelong learning participants, non-academic staff) for online teaching (working in LMS environments, synchronous and asynchronous forms, etc.). According to individual answers, these are most often online

100% 90% 11 Faculty level

80% 70% 60% 50%

10 Does not exist

40% 30% 20%

5 University level

10% 0%

Graph 16.  Existence of a Central Schedule for Deploying Courses in the LMS Environment. 25 20 15 10 5 0

Preparing the environment for Preparaon of seng, handing the wrien end in, and to the course evaluaon of (test) tasks

Familiarisaon with LMS funconality

Course content creaon

University level

23

21

20

18

15

Does not exist

3

5

6

8

11

Online oral tesng

Graph 17.  Existence of Seminars for Teachers to Support Competencies for Working in LMS.

182    Miroslav Dopita et al. instruction, telephone support, or helpdesk. On the contrary, the least is provided through the university’s wiki and MOOC courses. Support for users who do not speak Czech or Slovak is provided by 8 universities, another 10 stated that it is provided in part, and at two universities this form of user support is currently being addressed. Only one university used the addition of another form of user support, namely the existence of a specific position of LMS Unifor administrator at one of the faculties. A detailed distribution of responses between the forms of user support provided is shown in graph, No. 18. In half of the universities, there is support for online teaching for students with special educational needs (SEN), in six there is only partial support, in two it is currently being addressed, and in the remaining five there is no support of this type. The following graph, No. 19, shows the situation graphically. Universities, on a scale from 0% to 100%, indicated how many teachers would need to be trained in selected distance learning skills. In particular, the skills needed for the preparation of written completion of courses (tests) and the creation of hybrid courses in the LMS environment were mentioned, on the contrary, the least should be the need to train teachers in skills for synchronous online teaching. A detailed breakdown of the individual percentages for all instruments is shown in Graph No. 20 below. It was also found that universities stimulate their employees the most to create teaching materials (e.g., multimedia materials) in the form of financial rewards, as well as an award called “excellent teacher.” Another option was also used here, where it was stated that this stimulation is being addressed within projects, or that this issue is being addressed at individual faculties. The distribution of answers is shown in more detail in the following graph,

0

5

10

15

20

Online guides Telephone support Help desk Specialised workplace for support at the university level Individual support by professionals for online educaon Support for users who do not speak Czech/Slovak Specialised workplaces at the faculty level External suppliers "Wiki" University MOOC courses Others yes

No

Parally

Currently being resolved

Graph 18.  Provided Forms of User Support for Online Teaching.

25

30

The Pandemic Experience as a New Challenge for Public Czech    183 100%

2 Currently being resolved 6 Parally

90% 80% 70%

5 No

60% 50% 40% 30%

13 Yes

20% 10% 0%

% Yes

No

Parally

Currently being resolved

Graph 19.  Existence of Online Teaching Support for Students with SEN. 30

25

100%

100%

100%

100%

80%

80%

80%

80%

20

60%

15

40%

60%

60% 60%

60%

40% 10

5

0

40% 40%

20%

20% 20%

0%

40%

20%

0%

100% 80%

0%

20% 0%

Synchronous online Creaon of distance Creaon of hybrid Preparaon of the Online oral tesng teaching courses in the LMS courses in the LMS wrien end to the environment environment course (test)

Graph 20.  Proportion of Teachers That Will Need to Be Trained in the Given Issue. No. 21. The average percentage of employees who did not complete education in digitally supported teaching, depending on the content, is approximately 30%. It probably includes new employees, returning employees, but also employees who “did not need” to be trained, and do not appear in university statistics.

184    Miroslav Dopita et al. 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Financial reward

Alteraon of working hours in connecon with teaching

“Excellent Teacher” Award

Others

Yes

19

1

5

5

No

7

25

21

21

Graph 21.  Form of Stimulation of Workers for the Creation of Teaching Materials.

In this part of the questionnaire, universities also had the opportunity to add any comments to the questionnaire items related to material security. One university took advantage of this opportunity: “Question 23 –Possible training may involve new staff, externs, new doctoral students in teaching, etc. Online oral testing is not a purely technical form of training, but an answer to questions on the prevention of fraud and other unethical behaviour of students, which probably bothers the most. Overall, we will only map the readiness of teachers for online teaching, and this is connected with the need for training.”

3.4. Economic Support of Universities in the Field of Distance/ Online/Blended Learning/Digitally Supported Education Economic resources for the material provision of online education at universities are allocated almost evenly between the faculties and centrally, i.e., part of the budget of the Rectorate or its components, the median is also 50% for both components. In the case of the organization of distance learning, financial resources are then more often allocated at faculties than centrally. Here, too, universities chose their answer on a scale from 0% to 100%. The situation is shown in more detail in the following graph, No. 22. On the scale of 0% to 100% of the university, the budgets of the faculties and the budget of the university itself were most often indicated as the origin of economic resources for the provision of distance education; on the contrary, other public projects acquired by the university are used to the least extent. The distribution between individual financial sources is shown in more detail in the following graph, No. 23.

The Pandemic Experience as a New Challenge for Public Czech    185 30

25

100%

100% 90%

90% 20 80% 70% 15

50% 40%

10

30%

80% 70% 60% 50% 30%

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 40% 30%

20%

20% 5

20%

10%

10% 0

0%

0% Centrally

At the Faculty

Material allocaon

100%

10%

0% Centrally

90%

80% 70% 60% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% At the Faculty

Organizaonal allocaon

Graph 22.  Allocation of Economic Resources to Ensure Distance Education.

In terms of planning significant investments in the development of online education in the next five years, universities most often plan to invest in the development of multimedia educational materials, purchase of hardware for retrofitting for teachers and classrooms; on the contrary, investment in changing LMS and proctoring tools is least considered. The following graph, No. 24, shows all the options in more detail. Even in the part of the questionnaire concerning economic security, universities had the opportunity to add any comments to the questionnaire items of this part. This opportunity was taken advantage of by 2 art universities: “Both faculties use the experience and material equipment of their special study programmes ⦁⦁ Dramatic Production and Media (specialization Audiovisual Production and

Theatre and Radio and Television Dramaturgy and Screenwriting) at the Faculty of Theatre JAMU

186    Miroslav Dopita et al. 30

25

100% 90% 80% 70%

20

50% 40%

15

90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40%

5

40%

20%

50% 40% 10%

20%

20% 20%

10% 0%

10% 0%

0

70%

30%

30% 30%

10

100% 90%

0%

0% University budget

Faculty budget

Ministry of Educaon Other public projects programmes acquired by the university

Graph 23.  Origin of Economic Resources to Provide Distance Education. ⦁⦁ Composition (specialization Composition of Electroacoustic Music and Compo-

sition of Stage and Film Music) at the Faculty of Music.”

“Our school has invested adequate funds in the purchase of hardware and software for distance, online teaching.”

3.5. Obstacles to the Implementation of Distance/Online/Blended Learning/Digitally Supported Education at Universities In the last question, universities were to indicate what they saw as obstacles to the implementation of distance education. They identified the nature of the study programme of the university and the support of funding beyond the university

The Pandemic Experience as a New Challenge for Public Czech    187 0

5

No

Parally

10

15

20

25

30

Creaon of mulmedia teaching materials Purchase of hardware for equipping the teachers Purchase of hardware for equipping the classrooms Investment in basic infrastructure for e-learning Acquiring/expanding audiovisual studios for preparing mulmedia materials Investment in Human Resources Expanding or repairing LMS funconality Purchase/expanding the system for archiving mulmedia study materials Expanding/repair of specialised systems for synchronous teaching Purchase of so„ware for preparing audiovisual materials Proctoring tools LMS change(s) Yes

Graph 24.  Areas of Planned Significant Investments in the Development of Online Education in the Horizon of 5 Years. budget as the most common obstacles, while the smallest problems are seen in the absence of a common approach to online education for the entire university, and the lack of organizational support. Although several schools checked the other option in part for the group, they did not specify this group. A detailed breakdown of university responses is shown in Graph No. 25 below. None of the universities used the final option of adding their own message or notes to the questionnaire.

4. Discussion Based on the obtained data, public universities can monitor developments in the areas of distance/online/blended learning/digitally supported education in the Czech higher education environment, which corresponds to the goals of not only Czech universities to develop e-learning in the last decade (cf. Arnold & Sangrà, 2018; Visvizi, et al., 2020; Armakolas et al., 2018, González-Zamar et al., 2020). Distance/online/blended learning/digitally supported education at public universities in the Czech Republic is supported in strategies, especially in theoretical subjects of study programmes, both in 2021 and then in 2022, where the intention to support these forms appears in education at even more universities. For study

188    Miroslav Dopita et al. 0

5

No

Parally

10

15

20

25

30

SP character of the given university Support for financing over and above the university budget Naonal regulaon Decision by the teacher on using/not using online teaching Insufficient organisaonal support Non-existence of mutual approach to online teaching for the whole university Other Yes

Graph 25.  Obstacles in the Implementation of Online Education. programmes where skills are taught, universities tend to have full-time teaching or blended learning similarly to abroad (e.g., Dulohery et al., 2021; Mazur et al., 2021). More than half of the universities represented in the research centrally monitor or prepare feedback on online teaching for students. More than a fifth of universities have delegated this aspect to the faculties. Feedback is a necessary part of supporting students’ academic integrity (Richards et al., 2020). Foreign research also shows the need for systematic organization of digitally supported education and learning at universities (Gaebel et al., 2021; Klapkiv & Dluhopolska, 2020; Navickiene˙ et al., 2021). The research showed that the central rules for the combination of synchronous and asynchronous teaching are set at almost two-fifths of universities, and another fifth is currently being prepared. According to universities, online supported education is important, especially in emergency situations, in combined and distance forms of study, in hybrid forms of education and, last but not least, the importance of online supported education in employee education and in lifelong learning implemented by universities, for which foreign experiences could be inspiring (Hueske et al., 2022). Universities have also expressed interest in online education in foreign language study programmes, foreign language subjects in study programme plans, and in the implementation of foreign or virtual mobility, which is in line with the direction of virtual mobility and support for autonomous student learning (Leek & Rojek, 2021). The technical provision of online education is most often, i.e., in more than a third of university responses, a combination of different solutions. Nearly a quarter of universities prefer open source systems for their own installation, and one fifth for commercial LMS for their own installation. The most commonly used platform is LMS Moodle, at half of the universities, followed by MS Teams and own LMS systems. Thanks to the new experience of the university, it will also focus more attention on the selection and administration of the LMS, as indicated by the intentions at foreign universities that are considering technical

The Pandemic Experience as a New Challenge for Public Czech    189 teaching support (e.g., Malanga et al., 2022). Support for multimedia teaching is represented at most universities. Technical support for the preparation of multimedia teaching was declared by all universities but one, and software & methodological support by more than two thirds of universities. The calls for the interconnection of LMS systems are shown mainly in connection with libraries, e-resources, proctoring, calendars of teachers and students, and anti-plagiarism systems. In this context, foreign research emphasizes the support of academic integrity of students using these and other systems (Richards et al., 2020). On the contrary, the connection with study information systems, e-mail, and tools for synchronous teaching and knowledge verification is saturated. MS Teams and Zoom appear as the most used in the tools for synchronous teaching. The organization of online teaching at universities took place primarily at the faculty level, at two-fifths of universities, while one-fifth of universities dealt with the organization of online teaching centrally, and the remaining two-fifths did not systematically address the deployment of online teaching outside of the Czech Republic (e.g., Klapkiv & Dluhopolska, 2020, Navickiene˙ et al., 2021). Seminars on online teaching for teachers, at the level of LMS functionality, preparation of course content, preparation of assignments and assessment of tasks, and preparation of tests, were provided by almost four-fifths of universities. The most frequent support for online teaching was in the nature of online instructions, telephone support, helpdesk, and support of specialized university workplaces for online teaching. Foreign-speaking teachers, who had direct support at more than a quarter of universities, and partial support at more than a third of universities, were not left out either. The question here is the possible cooperation of universities in the implementation of online teaching, as shown by examples abroad (Murtonen et al., 2019). Half of the universities support the online study of students with SEN, almost one third have declared it in part, and one tenth are currently dealing with it. This is a challenge for one-fifth of universities. This issue needs to be addressed with regard to the type of specific needs, as already shown by existing studies (e.g., Tóthová & Sedlác˘ková, 2021). Universities face the task of training teachers in online teaching, at the level of 20–40% of teachers. It follows that most universities have already trained more than half of their teachers. The average percentage of employees who have not received training in digitally supported teaching, depending on the content, is approximately 30%. This probably includes new employees, returning employees, but also includes employees who “did not need” to be trained, and who do not appear in university statistics. At most universities, the allocation of economic resources for the material and organizational provision of distance education is distributed between central and faculty support, from 50 to 100%. Graphs 22 and 23 analyzing these issues tell us more about this. Universities most often plan investments in the field of online education in the creation of multimedia educational materials, the purchase of hardware for teachers and classrooms, and investments in e-learning infrastructure. Emphasis

190    Miroslav Dopita et al. should also be placed on investment in human resources, which 11 universities are considering in the first place, and 12 in part. Proctoring tools are being considered by four universities in the first place, and eight in part. The change of the LMS is under consideration by three universities. Among the most frequently mentioned obstacles to online teaching, the nature of study programmes has emerged where online teaching cannot be implemented. The next point was the issue of financing the technical provision of online teaching, and the restrictions of national regulations on the application of online teaching in full-time and part-time study with regard to the nature of the accreditation of study programmes, as pointed out by foreign studies (e.g., Stukalo & Dluhopolskyi, 2020).

5. Conclusion In the Czech Republic, there is a lack of experience with widespread distance education. In this context, Covid-19 served as one of the most important push factors for the HEIs to redesign their approaches to teaching and learning. Lessons that were drawn from the period of adaptation and change driven in HEIs by the Covid-19 pandemic helped a lot to start innovation in teaching and learning. The aim of the analysis was to describe the current state of the background for the implementation of distance education and e-learning at public universities in the Czech Republic, and to identify the specific needs of individual schools. The following findings are among the most interesting results of the analysis: ⦁⦁ Public universities have expressed interest in online education in foreign lan-

⦁⦁ ⦁⦁ ⦁⦁

⦁⦁ ⦁⦁ ⦁⦁

guage study programmes, foreign language subjects in curricula study plans, and in the implementation of foreign or virtual mobilities. The material provision of online education is most often, i.e., in more than a third of university responses, a combination of different solutions. The most frequently used platform is LMS Moodle, which is used by approximately 50% of universities, followed by MS Teams and own LMS systems. The calls for the interconnection of LMS systems are shown mainly in connection with libraries, e-resources, proctoring, calendars of teachers and students, and anti-plagiarism systems. On the contrary, the connection with study information systems, e-mail, and tools for synchronous teaching and knowledge verification is saturated. MS Teams and Zoom appear as the most used tools for synchronous teaching. The task ahead of public universities in the Czech Republic now is that of training teachers in online teaching, at the level of 20–40% of teachers.

The overall results of the analysis could be compared by individual universities with their own situations, and used to reflect on their own strategic concepts. A proposal for a specific measure was added to the analytical findings at individual universities. These measures became the basis for the creation of action plans for the development of distance education and e-learning.

The Pandemic Experience as a New Challenge for Public Czech    191 Among the most frequently mentioned obstacles to online teaching, the nature of study programmes has emerged where online teaching cannot be implemented. The next point is the issue of financing online teaching, and restrictions on national regulations for the application of online teaching in full-time and part-time forms of study.

Acknowledgments This chapter was prepared with the support of the central development project of universities in the Czech Republic Distance education as a tool for university development.

References Armakolas, S., Panagiotakopoulos, C., & Karatrantou, A. (2018). Teleconference in support of autonomous learning. European Journal of Open, Distance & E-Learning, 21(2), 27–43. doi: 10.2478/eurodl-2018-0005 Arnold, D., & Sangrà, A. (2018). Dawn or dusk of the 5th age of research in educational technology? A literature review on (e-)leadership for technology-enhanced learning in higher education (2013–2017). International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1). doi: 10.1186/s41239-018-0104-3 Best Colleges. (2021). Online Education Trends Report. [online] Retrieved from https:// www.usnews.com/best-colleges. Accessed on May 15, 2021. Bettinger, E. P., Fox, L., Loeb, S., & Taylor, E. S. (2017). Virtual classrooms: How online college courses affect student success. American Economic Review, 107(9), 2855– 2875. doi: 10.1257/aer.20151193 Bokayev, B., Torebekova, Z., Abdykalikova, M., & Davletbayeva, Z. (2021). Exposing policy gaps: The experience of Kazakhstan in implementing distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 15(2), 275–290. doi: 10.1108/TG-07-2020-0147 Chivu, R.-G., Orzan, G., & Popa, I.-C. (2019). Education software and modern learning environment: Elearning. ELearning & Software for Education, 3, 193–198. doi: 10.12753/2066-026X-19-163 Daniela, L., & Visvizi, A. (Eds.). (2021). Remote learning in times of pandemic. London: Routledge. Dulohery, K., Scully, D., Longhurst, G. J., Stone, D. M., & Campbell, T. (2021). Emerging from emergency pandemic pedagogy: A survey of anatomical educators in the United Kingdom and Ireland. Clinical Anatomy (New York, N.Y.), 34(6), 948–960. doi: 10.1002/ca.23758 Gaebel, M., Zhang, T., Stoeber, H., & Morrisroe, A. (2021). Digitally enhanced learning and teaching in european higher education institutions. Brussels/Geneva: European University Association. Retrieved from https://eua.eu/downloads/publications/digihe%20 new%20version.pdf González-Zamar, M.-D., Abad-Segura, E., López-Meneses, E., & Gómez-Galán, J. (2020). Managing ICT for sustainable education: Research analysis in the context of higher education. Sustainability (2071-1050), 12(19), 8254.

192    Miroslav Dopita et al. Hueske, A.-K., Aggestam Pontoppidan, C., & Iosif-Lazar, L.-C. (2022). Sustainable development in higher education in Nordic countries: Exploring E-Learning mechanisms and SDG coverage in MOOCs. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 23(1), 196–211. Johnson, A. F., Roberto, K. J., & Rauhaus, B. M. (2021). Policies, politics and pandemics: Course delivery method for US higher educational institutions amid COVID-19. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 15(2), 291–303. doi: 10.1108/ TG-07-2020-0158 Johnson, N., Veletsianos, G., & Seaman, J. (2020). US Faculty and administrators’ experiences and approaches in the early weeks of the Covid-19 pandemic. Online Learning, 24(2), 6–21. doi: 10.24059/olj.v24i2.2285 Klapkiv, Y., & Dluhopolska, T. (2020). Changes in the tertiary education system in pandemic times: Comparison of Ukrainian and Polish universities. Revista Romaneasca pentru Educatie Multidimensionala, 12(1Sup2), 86–91. doi: 10.18662/rrem/12.1sup2/250 Kuznyak, N. B. (2017). The modern distance learning: pro et contra. Young Scientist, 11(145), 466–469. Laufer, M., Leiser, A., Deacon, B., Perrin de Brichambaut, P., Fecher, B., Kobsda, C., & Hesse, F. (2021). Digital higher education: A divider or bridge builder? Leadership perspectives on edtech in a Covid-19 reality. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1). doi: 10.1186/s41239-021-00287-6 Leek, J., & Rojek, M. (2021). Functions of digital learning within the international mobility programme – Perspectives of university students and staff from Europe. Education and Information Technologies: The Official Journal of the IFIP Technical Committee on Education, 1–19. doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10855-y Malanga, A. C. M., Bernardes, R. C., Borini, F. M., Pereira, R. M., & Rossetto, D. E. (2022). Towards integrating quality in theoretical models of acceptance: An extended proposed model applied to e-learning services. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(1), 8–22. Mazur, K., Pantsyreva, H., & Prokopchuk, V. (2021). Distance form of education in agricultural universities: Features and problems. Colloquium-Journal, 13(100), 29–32. Murtonen, M., Laato, S., Lipponen, E., Salmento, H., Vilppu, H., Maikkola, M., … Skaniakos, T. (2019). Creating a national digital learning environment for enhancing university teachers’ pedagogical expertise – The case UNIPS. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 18(13), 7–29. doi: 10.26803/ ijlter.18.13.2 Navickiene˙, V., Droessiger, G., Valantinate˙, I., Trinku¯nas, V., & Jaras, A. (2021). University management solutions during the Covid-19 pandemic: A case study of Lithuania. Business, Management & Education/Verslas, Vadyba Ir Studijos, 19(2), 337–357. doi: 10.3846/bmee.2021.14870 Paulsen, F. M. (2002). An analysis of online education and learning management systems in the Nordic Countries. Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 5(3). https:// www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall53/paulsen53.htm Richards, R., Stevens, R., Silver, L., & Campbell, K. (2020). The impact of technology on online course integrity: A pilot study. Archives of Business Research, 8(11), 19–26. doi: 10.14738/abr.811.9299 Richards, R., Stevens, R. Silver, L., & Metts, S. (2019). Overcoming employer perceptions of online accounting education with knowledge. Administrative Issues Journal: Connecting Education, Practice, and Research, 8(2), 70–80. doi: 10.5929/2019.1.14.5 Stukalo, N., & Dluhopolskyi, O. (2020). Educational programs accreditation in pandemic times: Challenges for NAQA (Ukraine). Revista Romaneasca pentru Educatie Multidimensionala, 12(1Sup2), 167–172. doi: 10.18662/rrem/12.1sup2/260

The Pandemic Experience as a New Challenge for Public Czech    193 Tóthová, L., & Sedlácˇková, J. (2021). Fostering autonomy in learners with special needs: A specialized e-learning course. Language Learning in Higher Education, 11(2), 471–487. Turnbull, D., Chugh, R., & Luck, J. (2021). Transitioning to E-Learning during the Covid19 pandemic: How have Higher Education Institutions responded to the challenge? Education and Information Technologies: The Official Journal of the IFIP Technical Committee on Education, 26(5), 6401–6419. doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10633-w UNESCO. (2002). Open and distance learning trends, policy and strategy considerations. Paris: UNESCO. UNESCO. (2021). Education: From disruption to recovery. [online] Retrieved from https:// en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse#schoolclosures. Accessed on July 3, 2021. Visvizi, A., Daniela, L., & Chen, C.-W. (2020, June). Beyond the ICT- and sustainability hypes: A case for quality education. Computers in Human Behavior, 107. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2020.106304

This page intentionally left blank

Chapter 11

Humanistic Leadership and its Enduring Legacy in a Post-Covid-19 World Angela Lehr and Susie Vaughan Abstract As societies worldwide continue to navigate and recover from the impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic, the world is at a unique crossroads. How can leaders in higher education institutions (HEIs) prioritize holistic human needs and maximize interpersonal and collegial human connection, while continuing to guide and grow successful learning communities both inperson and virtually? With potential costs and benefits in mind, pertinent literature is reviewed, and the limitations and silver linings presented by the ongoing pandemic are explored. Different forms of grief and loss experienced by faculty and students as well as the effects of technostress amid this time of change are also recognized. Concepts and practices introduced by prominent humanistic thought-leaders are discussed as a way to navigate the educational impacts created by the pandemic. A key finding presented is that leaders and HEIs that prioritize human connections and relationships, in concert with adopting technological advancements, are better equipped to maintain personal well-being while enhancing academic success in the long term. By fostering learning environments based on psychological safety, compassion, autonomy, and adaptability, humanistic leaders contribute to the betterment of HEIs as a whole. To this end, the enduring legacy of humanistic leadership is pivotal in this new era of global and individual humanistic transformation amid change. Keywords: Humanistic leadership; Covid-19; posttraumatic growth; transformation; HEIs; crisis

Moving Higher Education Beyond Covid-19: Innovative and Technology-Enhanced Approaches to Teaching and Learning, 195–209 Copyright © 2023 by Angela Lehr and Susie Vaughan Published under exclusive licence by Emerald Publishing Limited doi:10.1108/978-1-80382-517-520231011

196    Angela Lehr and Susie Vaughan

1. Introduction Over 400 million active cases of Covid-19 were reported worldwide in the early months of 2022, with an approximation of over 1 million new cases reported every 24 hours during the most recent wave of Omicron infections (WHO, 2022). Moreover, nearly 6 million people have died globally from the virus, which is double the reported Covid-19 death toll from the previous year (WHO, 2022). Since January of 2020, global economies, organizations, school systems, and communities have grappled with quarantines, mask restrictions, vaccine guidelines, and a marked increase in the need for continued use of technology (Singh & Singh, 2020). Although operational and health advancements have been made in the two years after the onset of the pandemic, societal, organizational, and relational norms continue to change and fluctuate based on prolonged hardships caused by Covid-19 (CBPP, 2022). Within this current global pandemic context, individuals and HEIs have universally experienced chronic stress and undeniable grief due to the loss of life and normalcy, amplified examples of social inequity, political unrest, and workforce strife (Bhagat & Kim, 2020; Richardson, Ratcliffe, Millar, & Byrne, 2021). Since the Spring of 2020, technological platforms have been essential in forming collegial partnerships and friendships beyond geographical barriers, amplifying interdisciplinary collaborations, and combating loneliness (Singh & Singh, 2020). As technology accelerated to meet organizational and interpersonal demands, human–machine interactions have presented challenges and gifts (Seetharaman, 2020). How can educational leaders center the holistic needs and well-functioning of faculty, staff, and students while promoting academic and pedagogical excellence? The current Covid-19 context is an invitation to evolve and intentionally establish humanistic communities of education and practice (Tsao, 2018). Inclusive humanistic educational communities can promote educational advancement through compassion, psychological safety, and intentional relational practices. Humanistic leadership principles and incorporating elements of humanocracy enable leaders in HEIs to break down bureaucratic barriers and create learning institutions and virtual spaces that promote individual and collective resilience, innovation, and transformation (Hamel & Zanini, 2021). The reminder of this chapter is structured as follows. The next section elaborates on grief and loss in context of the pandemic. Section 3 suggests which lessons can be drawn from the dire Covid-19 experience. Sections 4 and 5 offer an insight into “reconstruction” strategies. Discussion and conclusions follow.

2. Grief and Loss: Post-Covid-19 Implications Grief is the natural process humans experience when losing a loved one or some significant aspect of life (APA, 2022). Although emotions and reactions associated with change and loss may not always be identified as grief, they are grief. Since the onset of the pandemic, everyone has lost something. Individuals and communities have been affected by illness, death, and the loss of normalcy and day-to-day certainty (Bernito, 2020).

Humanistic Leadership and Its Enduring Legacy    197 HEIs’ ecosystems are not different from larger communities in the experiences of loss that faculty, staff, and students have weathered. Classes and dorms closed, teaching models shifted dramatically, social connections were stymied, and dreams and aspirations were diverted. Faculty members were tasked with maintaining learning experiences for students while experiencing the challenges of the emergency shift to online education and its pedagogy with limited access to professional development (Crespin-Trujillo & Hora, 2021). Better understanding grief assists leaders in HEIs to promote healing in their institutions. The grief process can range in duration, intensity, and impact (Richardson et al., 2021). Although each person’s lived experience is unique, grief is also a universal experience that can unite people and give clarity regarding what matters most in life. Kessler (2019) purports, “Each person’s grief is as unique as their fingerprint” (para. 1). In public education and HEIs settings, where community is essential, thousands of people are experiencing grief in their own unique way and at various stages of the grief process. Grief can manifest tangibly as depression, anxiety, physiological distress, and apprehension about the future. Intense grief disrupts the immune system and can result in self-neglect or suicidal thoughts (APA, 2022). Other manifestations of grief may include a sense of ongoing despondence, exhaustion, trouble sleeping, worrying, rumination and often pretending for others that all is well (APA, 2022). Prolonged and persistent uncertainty taxes our physiological systems placing many on high alert, wondering what may happen next (Kessler, 2019). Like heavy blankets weighing down the human psyche, losses and stressors post-Covid-19 continue to create frustration, insecurity, and anguish. Anticipatory grief that occurs in anticipation of tragedy further impacts emotional and mental health. Moreover, when losses or threats are intangible or centered on future uncertainty or peril, this causes individuals to imagine the worst outcomes resulting in anticipatory loss reactions or ambiguous grief (Bernito, 2020). These stressors, over time, impact our physiological systems including immune functioning, digestive functioning, and hormonal processes. At times, there is a sense that it is not socially acceptable to grieve or express feelings of loss for fear of making others feel uncomfortable (Nagoski & Nagoski, 2021). Normalizing natural grief responses is vital to moving forward, individually and collectively. Higher education (HE) continues to experience the prolonged effects of Covid-19 and is not immune to the manifestations of grief.

2.1. Collective Grief and Prolonged Stress Covid-19 and other global events have caused collective grief, a term attributed to expert David Kessler (Brown, 2020). When one individual is grieving a distinct loss, there is often a relational system that includes others who may not be grieving in the moment and can be supportive. When people are grieving, both individually and collectively, it is difficult for individuals to find the energy and compassion to navigate their own process while attending to others’ losses. Additionally, individuals within groups and communities carry the burden of individual collective grief, the grief that feels both solitary and compounded by collective

198    Angela Lehr and Susie Vaughan impacting factors (Bernito, 2020). Feelings of collective grief have been amplified for educators who not only feel responsible for their own well-functioning, but the well-being of the communities of learners they impact (Crespin-Trujillo & Hora, 2021). Surge capacity, coined by Ann Masten, as a collection of adaptive physical and mental systems that support short-term survival in stressful or emergency situations, carried many people through the first several months of the pandemic. Surge capacity is not meant for extended exposure to loss and strife caused by the pandemic and other societal issues. Our surge capacity limits are overloaded and must be replenished in the midst of continued uncertainty (Haelle, 2020). Educators at all levels experienced the strain of responding to ongoing uncertainty in teaching for extended periods of time during the pandemic (Crespin-Trujillo & Hora, 2021). When the initial surge didn’t end, students and educators alike persevered to continue teaching and learning with the mental load of prolonged stress (Haelle, 2020). Notably, even when the stressors of the past years are eliminated, stress must continue to be dealt with using self-compassion, compassion for others, and gratitude (Nagoski & Nagoski, 2021). In terms of technostress, Zoom platform users increased from 10 million users in December 2019 to 300 million users by May 2020 (Bailenson, 2021). This created a significant technology learning curve often causing seasoned professionals and educators to feel like novices. A lack of confidence paired with increased reliance on technological platforms resulted in high levels of technostress (Panisoara, Lazar, Panisoara, Chirca, & Ursu, 2020). Although virtual platforms have provided valuable opportunities for learning and work efficiency, they were never meant to fully replace face-toface interactions. Zoom fatigue has emerged as the experience of drain and exhaustion that many feel after full days of virtual interactions. Bailenson (2021) identifies four factors that impact online fatigue and exhaustion. These factors include proximity and sustained eye contact, the lack of a full range of nonverbal cues, which also result in a higher cognitive load, spending “all day in a mirror,” and the limited mobility of spending long hours in virtual spaces. What has been a bridge also has physiological and mental consequences (Bailenson, 2021). Consider these four factors through the lens of students and professors in HE. In addition to the burdens of technostress is the continued accountability for teaching and learning. Although the shift to online instruction was rapid, expectations were not minimized. There was little time for professional development to ensure confidence in online pedagogy. Students and faculty continue to face challenges such as reliable access to technology, comfort with its use, and accountability to learning. Adjustments were and are being made to attendance policies, grading policies, and ways to minimize disruptions in learning (CrespinTrujillo & Hora, 2021). Humanistic mindsets and practices can aid in leading HEIs through the long-term effects of grief and chronic stress.

3. Silver Linings and Lessons in Progress A silver lining is “an advantage that comes from a difficult or unpleasant situation” (Cambridge Dictionary, 2021). The saying that every cloud has a silver lining

Humanistic Leadership and Its Enduring Legacy    199 serves as a beacon of hope and optimism amid life’s storms and difficulties. Like grief, the experience of turning toward the possibilities presented within struggle is both universal and unique. Articulating this human tendency is international in its wisdom as many of the world’s languages have some equivalent phrase (Financial Translator, 2019). Globally, humans have sought to balance what is painful by recognizing what is also providential. The Covid-19 pandemic has stretched our limits, tested our adaptability, and revealed undeniable pain points (Seetharaman, 2020). This extraordinary twentyfirst century moment in time has also presented us with silver lining experiences. The assets gained have been improved and normalized technological mediums for working and learning, new ways of relating to and experiencing each other when in-person connections are not feasible, and a greater understanding of our invaluable shared humanity. Pivots like digitization and normalizing virtual meeting and education platforms have allowed access to interactions that may not have been possible for some before the pandemic (Deloitte Digital, 2020). Without a doubt, technological and human creativity have generated educational and personal enrichments, or silver linings, that will have long-lasting effects on society and the worlds of work and learning. Two years after the initial virtual platform surge, popular meeting sites continued to boast high usage as Zoom and Cisco WebEx reported approximately 300 million daily users, Google Meet surpassed 100 million meeting users per day, and Microsoft Teams hosted nearly 250 million daily meeting participants (Beauford, 2022). Digital meeting platforms have facilitated the continuation of schooling, business operations, team connectivity, health appointments, and familial functions when in-person interactions or brick-and-mortar gatherings are deemed unsafe or impossible (De’, Pandey, & Pal, 2020). The pandemic also accelerated organizational prioritization of and shifts toward business digitization and E-commerce solutions more quickly than before the emergence of Covid-19, clearing organizational hurdles at speeds that were not previously thought possible (La Berge et al., 2020). The same has been true for HE as the optimization of educational platforms and applications has resulted in digital resilience (Bhagat & Kim, 2020). Technological changes that were once thought too cumbersome became a timely and efficient reality during the onset of Covid-19.

3.1. Technology, Human Connection, and Social Capital The health effects of isolation and loneliness as a focus of study have become acutely relevant in the context of Covid-19 health measures and the societal and political divisions society has been facing (Saltzman, Hansel, & Bordnick, 2020; UIC, 2020). In the USA, Surgeon General, Dr Vivek Murthy (2020), set out to better understand the health effects of loneliness and isolation in American culture. Murthy’s (2020) inquiry included a thoughtful appraisal of technology and its impact on human connection. While social media and technology can intensify feelings of lack and disconnection, if used with intentionality and for the purpose of joining with others pro-socially, technology can also aid in human connection

200    Angela Lehr and Susie Vaughan and in sustaining our most valued relationships (Murthy, 2020; Saltzman et al., 2020). Interacting in new and beneficial ways throughout the Covid-19 context has resulted in strengthening social capital and presented novel opportunities for local and international collaboration. Social capital is the benefit and sense of abundance gained by communities and organizations through investing in social connections, cooperation, relational generosity, and resource distribution (De Zúñiga, Barnidge, & Scherman, 2017). Shifting to online communications and bolstering ties through technological applications, forums, and social media have allowed increased cooperation and social integration (Riva, Mantovani, & Wiederhold, 2020). Although the bonds created through social media are different from offline relationships, these online connections have enhanced communal problem-solving and set a template for collaborating and assisting group or community members in relation to common values and priorities (De Zúñiga et al., 2017). Greater opportunities for cognitive diversity in a variety of contexts have also been a hopeful byproduct of this moment in time. Page (2017) asserts that interactions between groups and individuals with diverse educational backgrounds, identities, and life experiences result in cognitive diversity. Cognitive diversity, in turn, offers rich personal and professional benefits as ingenuity and problemsolving are maximized (Page, 2017). Collaborative forums and communities of practice have augmented interdisciplinary dialogue, diverse interactions, and have led to new creative partnerships (Lund Dean & Forray, 2020). The boundaries of who people interact with and how individuals and HEIs collaborate and deliver educational content have changed allowing for broader exposure to other disciplines, ideas, and mindsets.

3.2. Greater Awareness of Our Shared Humanity The paradox of human isolation amid greater digital connectivity has characterized the twenty-first century and intensified throughout the Covid-19 pandemic. Encounters that transcend this paradox have been powerful beacons of hope punctuating our shared humanity. In addition to technology, creative day-to-day personal interactions during times of lockdown like safely checking on neighbors, serenades, and tributes from apartment building windows, and drive-by milestone celebrations supported valuable interactions offering a sense of knowing and friendship that was not as intentional before the Covid-19 crisis (AARP, 2021; Clinch, 2020; Wykeham, Parson, & Maddison, 2020). Mental health awareness and stigma reduction have also been in the spotlight since the shifts of the last few years. Entities including HEIs continue to expand mental health programming and assistance while normalizing anxiety, depression, and other mental health conditions as health impacts rather than human deficiencies (Attermann, 2020; Saltzman et al., 2020). Organizations are placing more emphasis on well-being and the detrimental effects of chronic stress, calling for action on the part of leaders and decision-makers to continue humanizing school and work (Moss, 2021). Lastly, social media and technological applications based

Humanistic Leadership and Its Enduring Legacy    201 on positive psychology tenets provide pathways to empowerment, mindfulness, and self-actualization (Riva et al., 2020). Through the devastation and instability revealed during the Covid-19 pandemic, human connection, resilience, and the need to be whole and valued have also been magnified.

4. Posttraumatic Reconstruction and Growth The process of rebuilding following crises and disasters like the Covid-19 global pandemic, the societal and political upheaval seen around the world, and the various catastrophic environmental and weather events brought on by climate changes includes multiple phases ranging from before the onset of the event to the central impact and ending with reconstruction phases (University of Nebraska Public Policy Center, 2022). As individuals and society as a whole move through the different phases, there are emotional and communal highs and lows in each stage (Olson, Shanafelt, & Southwick, 2020). Although the world has entered the third year following the onset of the pandemic, the reconstruction phase has been fraught with setbacks compounded by new variants, social resistance to vaccine and mask mandates, continued racial and social hardships, and health inequities in many nations (CBPP, 2022). Humanistic reconstruction entails continuing to grieve and make meaning of what our world has faced over the last two years (Kessler, 2019). Healing and stabilization are occurring nonlinearly as moments of joy and an adapted sense of normalcy are juxtaposed with challenges, like the global struggles associated with racial, political, and social strife. These multidimensional experiences are also part of the post-Covid-19 rebuilding process (University of Nebraska Public Policy Center, 2022). As our organizations, schools, and communities continue the iterative process of assessing personal and professional boundaries, incorporating holistic views about humanity is paramount (Tsao, 2018). This time of recovery is a ripe opportunity to foster posttraumatic growth, demonstrate systemic equity, and set holistic practice norms within organizational and educational cultures (Roberts, 2020; Visvizi, Lytras, & Daniela, 2019).

5. Integrating Principles of Humanistic Leadership A humanistic leadership philosophy values the holistic well-being of all people and invests in the development of everyone within an organization (Zaki, 2020). As HEIs navigate personal, professional, and global complexities, brave, interpersonally skilled, and self-aware humanistic leaders are needed. Leaders are standing at a seminal moment where new perspectives and awareness offer opportunities for the future of leadership (Zaki, 2020). Leadership through this lens involves moving away from bureaucratic approaches that impose conformity (Hamel & Zanini, 2021). The foundation of humanistic leadership is the firm belief in the value and well-being of individual contributors and the collective community’s inherent worth regardless of the type of organization. Leading with positive regard and empathy while remembering that people are the heart of the organization are cornerstones of person-centered business and organizational practices (Hamel &

202    Angela Lehr and Susie Vaughan Zanini, 2021). A thriving organization is composed of highly engaged individuals with a common purpose. To harness the creative capabilities of these valued individuals, organizations must create structures and spaces for human connection and growth; an atmosphere that embraces work–soul integration and develops beyond work–life balance (Hamel & Zanini, 2021). Hancock (2015), founder of Humanist Learning Systems states, “Humanism as a philosophy is about doing good to be good” (para. 1). A humanistic leadership philosophy values the holistic well-being of all people and invests in the development and worth of everyone within an organization (Northouse, 2016). Across various sectors, there is currently a heightened awareness of the need for more caring and inclusive work environments (Visvizi et al., 2019). Knowing that humans are neurobiologically hardwired for connection and connection gives purpose and meaning to our lives, leaders are called to create nurturing spaces for people to be seen, heard, and connected (Brown, 2018; Hamel & Zanini, 2021). Amy Edmondson, as cited by Brown (2018) coined the phrase, psychological safety which refers to being in a setting where people respect and trust each other; believe they can take risks and make mistakes without penalty; and have a sense of confidence in how others will respond to them. If connection and community are human needs, they are also organizational needs. Strong organizations are people driven (Tenney, 2019). HEIs must also create environments that are psychologically safe, student centered, and value staff and faculty.

5.1. Humanistic Leadership and Engagement A 2018 Gallup survey revealed that barely one-third of US employees reported being fully engaged in their work, and globally, only 15% were engaged (Hamel & Zanini, 2021). Moss (2021) spotlights 2020 survey data indicating that nearly 90% of respondents considered their work to be harder since the onset of the pandemic and 85% admitted their mental health was in decline. People are feeling stressed, worried, and anxious about both their physical and mental health (Moss, 2021). There is limited research on the parallels in HE, yet the same extenuating circumstances are relevant across sectors. Based on data from April 2020, schools were shut down completely or gradually in more than 85% of all countries, creating lack of access for more than 1.6 billion students (Karadag, Su, & Ergin-Kocaturk, 2021). Rebounding from these disconnecting experiences requires a humanistic approach. Humanistic practices like building community and integrating interpersonal and emotional awareness and literacy can boost fulfillment in educational and work settings. The intentional focus on people in organizations leads to greater outcomes. People need to engage with each other to fully engage successfully (Moss, 2021). Human connection and community fuel engagement, innovation, collaboration, and problem-solving. Hamel and Zanini (2021) envision a future designed to maximize human contribution, “The rich, moist loam of community yields a harvest of commitment, capability, and creativity that can’t be extracted from the desiccated soil of bureaucracy” (p. 162). Visionary leaders and education practitioners will accept this challenge and move forward to a more humanistic future.

Humanistic Leadership and Its Enduring Legacy    203 5.2. Developing Humanistic Leadership Skills Many leaders may not feel equipped to lead in a humanistic way. A growing body of work continues to support the journey of leaders aiming to move to more humanistic practices. Concrete principles and behaviors can support leaders in building humanistic cultures. Hancock (2015) provides clarity for action by creating seven clear principles: respect, compassion, ethics, encouragement, reasonable approaches, strategic thinking, and service to others. The humanistic leadership model (HLM) developed by Nathanson (2021) provides further clarity. Leaders must be self-aware and be able to lead themselves before they can lead others. When leaders have the confidence to respond in a way that is aligned with their values and operate from self-awareness rather than self-protection, they can build healthy interpersonal working relationships. Fig. 1 demonstrates this model for leaders to develop the skills and behaviors that promote humanistic leadership. Humanistic leaders are aware of how their actions impact others, think systemically, have a clear vision, and can articulate that vision in a way that inspires others (Brown, 2018; Nathanson, 2021). Good management behaviors and coaching skills are also necessary to support people in their growth and development. Finally, there must be transparent expectations and processes in place to support the work of individuals and the collaboration of teams (Nathanson, 2021). Humanistic leaders demonstrate the personality traits of integrity, deep thinking, organization, and discipline. They have a high level of interpersonal sensitivity. Collaborative leadership behaviors are linked to getting the best results from people. These behaviors and traits help others feel valued and appreciated, resulting in higher levels of satisfaction and performance (Nathanson, 2021). There are

HLM (HUMANISTIC LEADERSHIP MODEL) ™

© DR. CRAIG NATHANSON

Self Awareness Systems Thinking Humanistic Leadership

Skills (LeadingManaging-Coaching)

Leadership Styles (Behaviors)

Leadership Traits (Personality)

Result - Short and long term success for both the individual, the organization, and society

Fig. 1.  HLM Developed by Dr Craig Nathanson (2021).

204    Angela Lehr and Susie Vaughan successful people-oriented businesses that serve their customers well and attain high profitability by caring for their employees. Based on research by Kotter and Heskett, Tenney (2019) states that the root cause of failure in organizations is prioritizing profit over people. When human needs like connection and autonomy are not valued, employees can become disengaged and underperform, resulting in a decline in customer service, which ultimately impacts profitability. A simple reordering of these priorities can have profound results. When the priority is on employees first, customers are well cared for, and higher profit margins are a natural outcome (Hamel & Zanini, 2021; Tenney, 2019). Southwest Airlines, a model company in this arena, is known for the dedication, devotion, and loyalty of its employees. Nucor Steel Company, another humanistic business, has its own recipe for success. Their recipe consists of creativity, competence, collaboration, commitment, and courage (Hamel & Zanini, 2021). Haier, a company in Qingdao, China, values innovation and collaboration, referring to this departure from bureaucracy as rendanheyi, a compilation of Chinese characters that connotes value for customers as well as value for employees (Hamel & Zanini, 2021). HEIs can learn valuable lessons from humanistic businesses. Now and in the future, HEIs are charged with reimagining education for greater access and effectiveness. At the core of this reinvention are the people. People must feel valued and psychologically safe to step boldly into innovation. Clark cites the first value of the “Agile Manifesto,” developed in 2001 by software engineers, which states that processes and tools are secondary to individuals and interactions. This type of environment rewards vulnerability and creates a collaborative dialogic process (Clark, 2022). Success stories like these foster resilience and fuel hope for the future. Human connection and community power engagement, innovation, collaboration, and problem solving. Humanistic leadership principles enable leaders to break down bureaucratic barriers and create HE systems and virtual spaces that empower members of learning communities to grow in revolutionary ways. The foundation of this work of humanistic leadership is the strong belief in the value of individual contributors and collective benefit (Hamel & Zanini, 2021).

6. Discussion: Fostering Humanistic Transformations in HE Humanistic leaders in HE can cultivate connected, human centric, and high-performing cultures in academia through communication, compassion, connection, adaptability, and anticipating change. Today’s administrators and educators must reframe leadership soft skills as humanistic proficiencies (Tsao, 2018). The following competency areas offer a guide for practical application in HEIs: ⦁⦁ Transparent communication. Roberts (2020) asserts “In times of crisis, silence

is not golden” (para. 15). Leaders and educators during this pandemic and beyond must offer clear, open, and thoughtful communication digitally and in-person considering both words and actions (Banerjee, 2020). Withholding information, overlooking the importance of checking-in with students, faculty,

Humanistic Leadership and Its Enduring Legacy    205

⦁⦁

⦁⦁

⦁⦁

⦁⦁

and staff, and not conveying decision-making rationale often results in misinformation and insecurity. As Brown (2018) advises, in the absence of concise and factual information, our brains will fill-in with false or incomplete data. Communicating openly and clearly reduces confusion and enhances growth in the long run. Compassion and emotional awareness. Treating people with compassion and acceptance around emotions strengthens relationships and enhances accountability and productivity (Banerjee, 2020). Recognizing the extent of peoples’ challenges is a vital pathway to creating psychological safety and building trust (Clark, 2022; Moss, 2021). Compassion is about being present without minimizing or exaggerating a person’s reality. Likewise, acknowledging and regulating emotions like anger or sadness in HE settings opens the door to joy, creativity, peace, and engagement (Tedeschi, 2020). Humanistic leaders and educators value the whole person as an emotional being. Cultures of connection and care. Talking about tragedy and difficult events is an essential component of posttraumatic growth and renewal (Tedeschi, 2020). Humanistic leadership that offers space and time for people to share what they have navigated during the pandemic is instrumental in formulating complete HEI narratives of the pandemic and aid the reconstruction of new, resilient realities (Tedeschi, Shakespeare-Finch, Taku, & Calhoun, 2018). Small group conversations, chatbox sharing if virtual, and retreats focused on connection and multidimensional self-care can assist. HE cultures that encourage and demonstrate care for self and care for others model humanistic values and mitigate toxic stress (Moss, 2021). Integration and agility. The rules and processes organizations and HEIs had in years past do not necessarily apply to the realities of post-Covid-19 professional and educational contexts. Moss (2021) urges leaders to integrate online work requirements and balance human limits by being aware of maintaining manageable workloads and being mindful of the amount of screen time that is asked of members. In the context of HE, this means being mindful of faculty and student mental and emotional bandwidth when making requests or setting academic parameters. Integration and agility also involve providing opportunities for faculty and students to responsively tailor and develop habits and efficiencies that will contribute to collective progress like quality instruction and student retention (Banerjee, 2020; Visvizi et al., 2019). Humanistic leaders are willing to courageously embrace new possibilities and the crucial vulnerability of the human experience (Brown, 2018). Anticipating and working with disruptions. According to change and reinvention expert, Zhexembayeva (2020), navigating continuous disruptions like hindered Wi-Fi, dropped Zoom calls, and personal absences due to competing roles are now a mainstay of many professional contexts. The way to navigate disruption while remaining productive in HE is to proactively anticipate and normalize this reality while being open to reinvention. Reinvention is about holding the individual and HEI needs of the present in tandem with an ever-evolving future without being paralyzed or overlooking important need indicators (Zhexembayeva, 2020). Humanistic leaders must notice and work with signals

206    Angela Lehr and Susie Vaughan of coming change or chaos rather than ignore disturbances. Today’s problems require new solutions. Daily reflection and regular HEI leadership self-evaluation efforts are humanistic practices that promote insight, self-awareness, and growing beyond blind spots (Brown, 2018; Zhexembayeva, 2020).

7. Conclusion The current post-Covid-19 context is an invitation for HEIs to evolve and intentionally establish inclusive professional and learning communities while upholding high academic standards through humanistic leadership practices. Following the onset of the pandemic, technological and human creativity have generated professional and personal enrichments, or silver linings that have already impacted how societies work and which individuals and HEIs connect with for collaboration and professional partnerships. Boundaries have changed allowing for broader exposure to other people and mindsets in service of growth and transformation. Humanistic principles that place people before profits are critical for long-term success. Care for students, faculty, staff, administrators, and learning communities as a whole, promotes thriving HEIs in this changing world (Hamel & Zanini, 2021; Tsao, 2018). In the words of Nathanson (2021), “Becoming a humanistic leader is not optional, but mandatory, if we aim for sustainability at all levels now and into the future” (para. 1). Responsive and authentic leadership in education rooted in humanism is essential and timely.

References AARP. (2021, January 22). Postal carrier delivers human connection during COVID-19 [Video]. YouTube. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-b9QQifrKQ APA. (2022). American Psychological Association Dictionary. (2020). Grief. Retrieved from https://dictionary.apa.org/grief Attermann, J. (2020, September 3). Offering hope and help amid the hurt. The National Council for Mental Well-Being. Retrieved from www.thenationalcouncil.org/ BH365/2020/09/03/offering-hope-and-help-amid-the-hurt/ Bailenson, J. N. (2021). Nonverbal overload: A theoretical argument for the causes of Zoom fatigue. Technology, Mind, and Behavior, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1037/tmb0000030 Banerjee, S. (2020). Pandemic is live classroom for sensitive leadership. The Times of India. Retrieved from https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/ pandemic-is-live-classroom-for-sensitive-leadership/articleshow/79271199.cms Beauford, M. (2022). The state of video conferencing in 2022. Retrieved from https:// getvoip.com/blog/2020/07/07/video-conferencing-stats Bernito, S. (2020, March 23). That discomfort you’re feeling is grief. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from hbr.org/2020/03/that-discomfort-youre-feeling-is-grief Bhagat, S., & Kim, D. (2020). Higher education amidst COVID-19: Challenges and silver lining. Information Systems Management, 37(4), 366–371. Brown, B. (2018). Dare to lead. New York, NY: Random House.

Humanistic Leadership and Its Enduring Legacy    207 Brown, B. (Host) (2020, March 31). David Kessler and Brené on grief and finding meaning [Audio Podcast]. Unlocking Us. Retrieved from brenebrown.com/podcast/davidkessler-and-brene-on-grief-and-finding-meaning/ Cambridge Dictionary. (2021). Silver lining. Cambridge Dictionary Press. Retrieved from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/silver-lining. Accessed on February 21, 2022. CBPP. (2022). Tracking the COVID-19 economy’s effects on food, housing, and employment hardships. Retrieved from https://www.cbpp.org/research/poverty-andinequality/tracking-the-Covid-19-economys-effects-on-food-housing-and Clinch, M. (2020, March 14). Italians are singing songs from their windows to boost morale during coronavirus lockdown. CNBC. Retrieved from www.cnbc.com/2020/03/14/ coronavirus-lockdown-italians-are-singing-songs-from-balconies.html Clark, T. (2022). Agile doesn’t work without psychological safety. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2022/02/agile-doesnt-work-without-psychological-safety? Crespin-Trujillo, V., & Hora, M. (2021). Teaching during a pandemic: Insights into faculty teaching practices and implications for future improvement. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2021(195), 13–22. De’, R., Pandey, N., & Pal, A. (2020). Impact of digital surge during covid-19 pandemic: A viewpoint on research and practice. International Journal of Information Management, 55, 102171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102171 Deloitte Digital. (2020, May 21). How technology is changing the world during COVID-19. Retrieved from https://www.deloittedigital.com/us/en/blog-list/2020/how-technologyis-changing-the-world-during-covid-19.html De Zúñiga, H. G., Barnidge, M., & Scherman, A. (2017). Social media social capital, offline social capital, and citizenship: Exploring asymmetrical social capital effects. Political Communication, 34(1), 44–68. doi:10.1080/10584609.2016.1227000 Financial Translator. (2019, January 19). Multilingual idioms, sayings, and colloquialisms. Retrieved from https://financial-translator.com/tag/idioms-in-other-languages/ Haelle, T. (2020, August 17). Your surge capacity is depleted – it’s why you feel awful. Elemental. Retrieved from https//medium.com/your-surge-capacity-is-depleted-it-swhy-you-feel-awful-de285d542f4c Hamel, G., & Zanini, M. (2021). Humanocracy: Creating organizations as amazing as the people inside them. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press. Hancock, J. (2015). 7 principles of humanistic leadership. Humanist Learning Systems. Retrieved from https://humanisthappiness.blogspot.com/2015/06/7-principles-ofhumanistic-leadership Karadag, E., Su, A., & Ergin-Kocaturk, H. (2021). Multi-level analyses of distance education capacity, faculty members’ adaptation, and indicators of student satisfaction in higher education during COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), 57. Kessler, D. (2019, November 15). Our experience of grief is unique as a fingerprint. Literary Hub. Retrieved from https://lithub.com/our-experience-of-grief-is-unique-as-a-fingerprint/ La Berge, L., O’Toole, C., Schneider, J., & Smaje, K. (2020, October 5). How COVID19 has pushed companies over the tipping point – and transformed businesses forever. McKinsey & Company. Retrieved from www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/ strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/how-covid-19-has-pushed-companiesover-the-technology tipping-point-and-transformed-business-forever Lund Dean, K., & Forray, J. M. (2020). A silver linings playbook, COVID-19 edition. Journal of Management Education, 44(4), 399–405. Moss, J. (2021, February 10). Beyond burned out. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from hbr.org/2021/02/beyond-burned-out

208    Angela Lehr and Susie Vaughan Murthy, V. (2020). Together: The healing power of connection in a sometimes lonely world. New York, NY: Harper Collins. Nagoski, E., & Nagoski, A. (2021). Burnout: The secret to unlocking the stress cycle. New York, NY: Ballantine Books. Nathanson, C. (2021). The humanistic leadership model. Excelsior College Journal of Business and Technology. Retrieved from https://www.excelsior.edu/article/thehumanistic-leadership-model-hlm/#author Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage Publishing. Olson, K., Shanafelt, T., & Southwick, S. (2020). Pandemic-driven posttraumatic growth for organizations and individuals. JAMA, 324(18), 1829–1830. doi:10.1001/ jama.2020.20275 Page, S. (2017). The diversity bonus: How great teams pay off in the knowledge economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Panisoara, I. O., Lazar, I., Panisoara, G., Chirca, R., & Ursu, A. S. (2020). Motivation and continuance intention towards online instruction among teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic: The mediating effect of burnout and technostress. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(21), 8002. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17218002 Richardson, L., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, B., & Byrne, E. (2021). The Covid-19 pandemic and the bounds of grief. Think, 20(57), 89–101. doi:10.1017/S1477175620000366 Riva, G., Mantovani, F., & Wiederhold, B. K. (2020). Positive technology and COVID19. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 2020, 581–587. https://doi. org/10.1089/cyber.2020.29194.gri Roberts, R. (2020). COVID-19, leadership and lessons from physics. The Australian Journal of Rural Health, 28(3), 232. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajr.12649 Saltzman, L. Y., Hansel, T. C., & Bordnick, P. S. (2020). Loneliness, isolation, and social support factors in post-COVID-19 mental health. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 12(S1), S55–S57. https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0000703 Seetharaman, P. (2020). Business models shifts: Impact of Covid-19. International Journal of Information Management, 54, 102173. Retrieved from www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/abs/pii/S0268401220309890 Singh, J., & Singh, J. (2020). COVID-19 and its impact on society. Electronic Research Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2(1). Retrieved from www.eresearchjournal.com/volume-2-issue-i-jan-march-2020/ Tedeschi, R. G. (2020). Growth after trauma. Harvard Business Review, 98(4), 127–131. Tedeschi, R. G., Shakespeare-Finch, J., Taku, K., & Calhoun, L. G. (2018). Posttraumatic growth: Theory, research, and applications. London: Routledge. Tenney, M. (2019). Why the best leaders make love the top priority. TEDx West Chester. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/matt_tenney_why_the_best_leaders_ make_love_the_top_priority_jan_2019 Tsao, A. (2018, February 27). Humanistic leadership: A new era of leadership has begun. Advisorpedia. Retrieved from https://www.advisorpedia.com/growth/humanisticleadership-a-new-era-of-leadership-has-begun/ UIC. (2020, April 29). COVID-19: The disproportionate impact on marginalized populations. Retrieved from https://socialwork.uic.edu/news-stories/Covid-19disproportionate-impact-marginalized-populations/ University of Nebraska Public Policy Center. (2022). Phases of disaster. Nebraska Strong. Retrieved from https://region4bhs.org/Portals/0/Stages%20of%20Disaster%20 NE%20Strong%20Flyer%202.pdf ?ver=2019-09-11-102019-690 Visvizi, A., Lytras, M. D., & Daniela, L. (2019). Education, innovation, and the prospect of sustainable growth and development. In A. Visvizi, M. D. Lytras, & L. Daniela (Eds.), The future of innovation and technology in education: Policies and practices for teaching and learning excellence (pp. 297–305). Bingley: Emerald Publishing.

Humanistic Leadership and Its Enduring Legacy    209 WHO. (2022, February 15). WHO coronavirus (COVID-19) dashboard. Retrieved from https://covid19.who.int/ Wykeham, O., Parson, A., & Maddison, M. (2020, April 4). Drive-by birthday party parade trend overcomes coronavirus social distancing. ABC News. Retrieved from www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-05/coronavirus-drive-by-birthday-party-parade-forsocial-distancing/12116676 Zaki, J. (2020, September 14). Don’t just lead your people through trauma, help them grow. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from hbr.org/2020/09/dont-just-lead-your-peoplethrough-trauma-help-them-grow Zhexembayeva, N. (2020). The chief reinvention officer handbook: How to thrive in chaos. Washington, DC: Idea Press Publishing.

This page intentionally left blank

Index Academic teaching, 33 Action learning, 110, 114 (see also Remote learning) action learning-based approach, 119 approach, 114–115 challenges, 116–117 data analysis, 115–116 findings, 116 impact on educators, 120–121 impact on students, 119–120 implementation of innovative learning approaches, 117–119 innovative learning approaches in view of Covid-19 challenges, 112–114 learning paths in new technological environment, 111–112 literature review, 111 methodology, 114 process, 6 sample, 115 Adolescents, 148, 150 concern for, 155 schooling, 149 ALTAX method, 60 Ambidextrous management, 57 Ambiguous grief, 197 Anticipatory grief, 197 Assessment design, 133–134 Backward design approach, 133 Bibliometric analysis, 14, 16 Big data analytics, 112 Blackboard Learning Management System, 134 Blackboard quizzes, 135

Blended, 34 learning, 133–134 Business simulations, 112 Case strategy digitally enhanced learning, 167 Case study of University Master Course, 109 Center for High Defense Studies (CASD), 114 Centrality, 15 Change career development, 89–91 Chaos career development, 89–91 Clustering, 99 Coding, 137–138 Cognitive diversity, 200 Collective grief, 196–198 Commercial conferencing platforms, 33 Communication, 42 challenges, 32 in online and onsite settings, 39–42 Competencies, 24 Concrete principles, 203 Content analysis, 137–138 Course design layer, 132 Covid-19, 55–58, 68, 149 context, 196 crisis, 200 death, 196 disruptions, 57 HEIs during, 17–20 and impact on education worldwide, 88–89 innovative learning approaches in view of Covid-19 challenges, 112–114 in Latvia, 149–151

212    Index outbreak, 89 pandemic, 2, 30, 55, 69, 82, 148, 166 Creswell’s Participant Selection Model, 94 Cronbach’s alpha, 74 Cultural background, 46 Curricula study plans, 190 Czech higher education environment, 187 Czech Republic, 167 Data analysis, 115–116 methods, 94–96 Data collection, 135–137, 168 Databases, 16 Dataset, 135–137 Digital divide, 30 Digital inequality, 69 Digital technology, 55, 57 Digitally supported education, 170 Digitally-driven innovation process, 33 Diplomacy, 33 Disciplinary instructional process, 131 Discipline-specific methodology, 135 Distance education, 165 Distance/online/blended learning/ digitally supported education, 187 material provision of universities in field of, 177–180 obstacles to implementation of distance/online/blended learning/digitally supported education at universities, 186–187 organizational support of universities in field of, 180–184 Distributed locations, 34 Dysfunctional multitasking, 47 E-learning, 57, 165 approach, 112

Economic resources, 184 Economic support of universities in field of distance/online/ blended learning/digitally supported education, 184–186 Education, 4, 54 process, 69 Education technology (edtech), 110 Educational approach, 112 Educational divide, 30 Educational environment, 110 Educational leaders, 196 Educational process, 6 Educators, impact on, 120–121 Effective coping strategies, 71 Emergency remote teaching, 88 End-of-year module feedback, 45 Engagement, humanistic leadership and, 202 English for Academic Purposes II (EAP II), 134 Environmental hygiene practices integration, 89 European Union (EU), 148 Ex-post feedback tools, 44 Extracurricular activities, 150 Faculty, 2–3 members, 70 Faculty of Theology, 73 Feedback co-occurrences of codes with implemented and not implemented, 140 content analysis and coding, 137–138 dataset and data collection, 135–137 design, 133–134 limitations, 140 method, 134 physical setting, 134 as relational process, 132–134

Index    213 resubmission of tasks, 139 results, 138 segments with code for implemented and not implemented, 139 type and level for feedback generated by course design, 138 type and level for instructor generated, 139 Foreign-speaking teachers, 189 Formative assessments, 135 Gamification, 57, 60 Gen-Z, 149 Gig economy, 16 Global trauma, 71 Google tools, 177 Grief process, 196–198 Grounded Theory approach, 94 Health hygiene practices integration, 89 Hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA), 91, 96 High school graduates, 148 Covid-19 pandemic in Latvia, 149–151 disruptions to plans, 158–160 methods and data, 151–152 reflections on remote schooling and concerns, 152–155 results, 152 stress and uncertainty, 155–158 Higher education (HE), 32, 68, 90, 131, 197 chaos, change, and students’ career development, 89–91 clustering, 99 covid-19 and impact on education worldwide, 88–89 data analysis methods, 94–96 descriptive statistics, 96–97 humanistic transformations in, 204–206

interviews, 97–99 life career skills development in, 88 materials and methodology, 91–96 online learning in, 69 results, 96 sampling, 92–94 sector, 82 utilizing mixed methods design, 92 Higher education institutions (HEIs), 30 88, 167 context and book’s relevance, 2–3 during covid-19 pandemic, 17–20 ecosystems, 197 post-covid-19, 2 review, 3–8 science mapping, 14–17 in times of covid-19, 14 Humanist Learning Systems, 202 Humanistic leaders, 204 Humanistic leadership developing humanistic leadership skills, 203–204 fostering humanistic transformations in HE, 204–206 grief and loss, 196–198 integrating principles of humanistic leadership, 201–204 philosophy, 201 posttraumatic reconstruction and growth, 201 principles, 196 silver linings and lessons in progress, 198–201 Humanistic leadership model (HLM), 203 Humanistic reconstruction, 201 Humanistic transformations in HE, 204–206 Humanity, greater awareness of shared, 198–201 Hybrid, 34 sessions, 47

214    Index Inclusive humanistic educational communities, 196 Information and communication technologies (ICTs), 6, 19, 149 Infrastructural challenges, 75 Innovative learning approaches (see also Action learning) implementation of, 117–119 in view of covid-19 challenges, 112–114 Inquiry-based-learning, 113 Institutional Review Board, 135 Integrating principles of humanistic leadership, 201 developing humanistic leadership skills, 203–204 humanistic leadership and engagement, 202 Integrative teaching approach, 114 Internal consistency, 74 Interviews, 97–99 Italy, center for high defense studies in, 114 Joy Labs at University of Palermo, Argentina, 58–60 Latvia, covid-19 pandemic in, 149–151 Leadership, Change Management and Digital Innovation (LCMDI), 114 University Master Course, 115, 120 Learner agency, 130 learner-centered methods, 114 stage, 131 Learning process, 24, 98, 110 LMS Moodle, 179–180 systems, 189 Loss, 196–198 Low-mobilities society, 56

Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), 34 Material provision of universities in field of distance/online/ blended learning/digitally supported education, 177–180 Meditation, 71 Mixed methods design, 92 paradigm, 91 Motor themes, 15 Multilevel designs, 91 Multiphase designs, 91 Multivariate correspondence analysis (MCA), 96 dimension output, 99 Negative coping strategies, 71 Negotiating/negotiation, 40, 46 ecosystems, 35 process, 47 similarities between teaching and, 35–37 Negotiators, 42 Networking, 40 New normal, 2, 59 Non-verbal communication, 39 Nucor Steel Company, 204 Online didactic methods, 116 Online education, 33 Online international negotiation aims, scope, and definitions, 31–35 appreciation, 43 approaches to mitigating undesired impacts, 42–43 communication and variability in online and onsite settings, 39–42 elements of teaching and negotiating ecosystems, 36 focus and motivation, 43 focused speech, 42–43

Index    215 migrating from physical room to online, 37 negotiating vs. teaching objectives, 37 pre-recorded videos, 43 robust and seamless preparation, 42 similarities between negotiating and teaching, 35–37 transferability, 43–46 unresolved challenges, 46–48 Online learning, 47, 89 Online negotiation, 34 Online negotiators, 45 Online remote learning process, 70, 80 Online teaching, 33–34 aims, scope, and definitions, 31–35 appreciation, 43 approaches to mitigating undesired impacts, 42– communication and variability in online and onsite settings, 39–42 elements of teaching and negotiating ecosystems, 36 focus and motivation, 43 focused speech, 42–43 methods, 34 migrating from physical room to online, 37 negotiating vs. teaching objectives, 37 pre-recorded videos, 43 robust and seamless preparation, 42 similarities between negotiating and teaching, 35–37 transferability, 43–46 unresolved challenges, 46–48 Onsite settings, communication and variability in, 39–42 Organizational support of universities in field of distance/online/ blended learning/digitally supported education, 180–184

PANCOE Covid-19 and tourism industry, 55–58 Joy Labs and PANCOE at University of Palermo, Argentina, 58–60 method, 58 at University of Palermo, Argentina, 58–60 Pandemic distance learning, 166 Perceived stress scale (PSS), 152 Percentage frequency, 138 Physical room to online, migrating from, 37 Pleasure, 55 importance of, 59 Positive strategies, 71 Post-covid-19 implications, 196 collective grief and prolonged stress, 196–198 greater awareness of our shared humanity, 198–201 Posttraumatic growth, 201 Posttraumatic reconstruction, 201 Pre-recorded course modules, 34 Pre-recorded videos, 46 Private international universities, 41 Probability sampling, 72 Prolonged stress, 196–198 Public Czech universities economic support of universities in field of distance/online/ blended learning/digitally supported education, 184–186 material provision of universities in field of distance/online/ blended learning/digitally supported education, 177–180 methodology, 168–169 obstacles to implementation of distance/online/blended learning/digitally supported education at, 186–187

216    Index organizational support of universities in field of distance/online/blended learning/digitally supported education, 180–184 pandemic experience as new challenge for, 168 results, 169 strategies in field of distance/ online/blended learning/ digitally supported education, 169–177 Qualitative data analysis, 94 Quality education, 148 Quantitative data analysis, 94 grounded theory approach, 94 hierarchical cluster analysis, 96 MCA, 96 qualitative data analysis, 94 Reflection, 71 Relational process blended learning, 133–134 feedback as, 132 Remote learning, 148, 153 context of, 149 data analysis, 74 data collection, 72 literature review, 68–72 main results, 74 methodology, 72–74 overcome challenges in study process, 78–79 participants, 72–74 perceived benefits of, 76–77 process, 70, 72 reliability statistics, 74 satisfaction with organization of, 77–78 students’ challenges with, 74–76 Remote schooling and concerns, reflections on, 152–155 Research question (RQ), 132

Research tool, 168 Resilience concept, 58 Sampling, 92–94 participants selected using maximal variation principle, 95 School graduates, 149 Science mapping, 14–17 SciMat Analysis, 14, 17–20 Seamless process, 42 Seamlessness, 42 Self-tests, 44 Serious games, 112 Short quizzes, 44 Smart services, 16 Socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization model (SECI model), 118 Society, 4 Sound course design, 131 Southwest Airlines (model company), 204 Spearman’s correlation analysis, 77 Special educational needs (SEN), 182 Stockholm School of Economics in Riga (SSE Riga), 151 Strategic diagram, 15, 19 analysis, 18 Stress, 155–158 Students academic performance, 55 career development, 89–91, 100 challenges with remote learning, 74–76 experiences, 82 impact on, 119–120 learning process, 140 perceptions, 24 satisfaction, 23 Study process, 5, 79 Sustainable Development Goals, 90 Swiss Institute of Technology, 48

Index    217 Teachers online learning, 113 online teaching, 113 Teaching (see also Online teaching) ecosystems, 35 methods, 34 process, 152 similarities between negotiating and, 35–37 Technology acceptance model (TAM), 21 Technology-driven transformative process, 32 Technology-enhanced learning (TEL), 3, 111 Thematic network, 15, 19 Time management skills, 97 Tourism education, 4, 54, 56 industry, 54–58 Traditional training, 113 Training courses, adequate, 89 Transferability, 43 appreciation, 45 focus and motivation, 45–46 focused speech, 45 pre-recorded videos, 46 robust and seamless preparation, 44–45 Transition process, 99

Uncertainty, 155–158 UNESCO, 165 bodies, 34 United Nations Principles for Responsible Management Education (UNPRME), 114 Universities, 172 University of Latvia (UL), 68 User-acceptance, 19 research on, 21 Variability in online and onsite settings, 39–42 Video conferencing, 22 Video Conferencing Software (VCS), 40 Virtual learning management systems, 22 Web of Science (WoS), 4, 16 Web-based commercial platforms, 34 World Economic Forum (WEF), 90 Young adolescents, 157 Young age, 157 Zoom, 34, 177