International Journal of Education and Pedagogy (IJEAP) eISSN: 2682-8464 [Vol. 2 No. 4 December 2020]
Journal website: http://myjms.mohe.gov.my/index.php/ijeap
THE IMPACT OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC ON TEACHING AND LEARNING: VOICES OF FACULTY
Phawani Vijayaratnam1*, Nurien Hidayu Muhamad Rusly2 and Ayeswary Sivarajah3
1 2 Center of Liberal Arts and Languages, INTI International University, Nilai, MALAYSIA
3 HELP Matriculation Centre, HELP University, Subang, MALAYSIA
*Corresponding author: phawani.vijayaratnam@newinti.edu.my Article Information:
Article history:
Received date : 20 November 2020 Revised date : 8 December 2020 Accepted date : 20 December 2020 Published date : 26 December 2020
To cite this document:
Vijayaratnam, P., Muhamad Rusly, N.,
& Sivarajah, A. (2020). THE IMPACT OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC ON TEACHING AND LEARNING:
VOICES OF FACULTY. International Journal Of Education And Pedagogy, 2(4), 339-351.
Abstract: The disruption brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic, although unpredictable and uncertain, was tackled innovatively by learning institutions worldwide. It allowed transformative change to happen naturally and innovatively in online education. Over the years, studies of constructivist student-centered teaching styles have emerged. Hence the shift from teacher centered to student centered teaching was not a sudden move but a slow, concerted yet natural alignment to support the learning styles of the millennial generation today. This research will delve into instructors’ experiences in fully online teaching and learning during theCovid-19 pandemic using key findings from past research of Lewis and Hamid. (2006), Bradford and Wyatt (2010) and Muhamad Rusly et.al.
(2020) as a starting point. A semi-structured open ended questionnaire was designed to get responses from instructors. This was followed by a focus group discussion to delve deeper into instructor experiences which could further inform the future direction of and practice in virtual instruction. A key finding will be that this pandemic was an unavoidable disruption that brought the teaching fraternity together to think of novel ways of using technology to transform online teaching and learning, thus making it a positive learning curve for the community.
Keywords: Covid-19; Disruption; Online Learning; Best practices; Innovation.
1. Introduction
The Covid-19 pandemic with its share of lock downs, social distancing and closure of learning institutions created a robust shift across teaching institutions globally. There was a massive push for the learning fraternity to think of Education in a different perspective, especially in matters of expectation, speed, impact and preparedness (Farooq et. al. 2020).
The initial drawbacks for institutions to go for fully online delivery were many. Firstly, was the issue of stable bandwidth connectivity for real time learning as high data usage impacts the vulnerable social and economically disadvantaged students. (UNESCO International Institute for Higher Education, 2020). Other than that, institution preparedness in having a dedicated online platform for e-learning for a smooth blend to online learning together with teacher and student preparedness to embrace fully online learning were also important aspects. In retrospect, the pandemic was an unavoidable disruption that brought the teaching fraternity together to think of novel ways of using technology to enhance the teaching and learning experiences for both learners and educators.
2. Literature Review
The plunge from traditional face to face to online education was made easy by the gradual change and adaptability among instructors globally and over time, especially when dealing with the current millennial generation. Past researches have identified ‘best practices’ in adult learning such as facilitating a cooperative learning environment, encouraging active learning, communicating frequently between academic staff and students, providing prompt feedback to students and emphasizing time on tasks (Chickering and Gamson,1987; Chickering and Ehrmann, 1996). Over the years, social networking and virtual world platforms from smart phones to facebook, twitter, and google scholar have disrupted the teaching and learning scene with their flexibility and convenience. Research has revealed of universities’ concerted efforts in harnessing technology in formal professional development courses focusing on blended learning, action research skills, assessment for learning etc. The aim is to keep abreast with the times and to manage the challenges of large classes and student diversity and inclusion (Deng and Tavares (2013); Ghavifekr and Rosdy (2015); Diane (2017). Zhang’s (2019) study using WeChat based blended learning to optimize learning in a network marketing course found that WeChat could cultivate students’
exchange of ideas to promote deep learning unrestricted by time or space. Yang. et. al. (2017) found Facebook an effective educational tool and Lai (2013) saw the strength in Facebook for first year Law students especially in providing quick feedback, pastoral care and for administration purposes.
Research on teaching styles by Alhussain (2012); Ahmed and Mubeen (2013), Krishnan et, al.
(2020) and Vijayaratnam et. al. (2020) using the Staffordshire Evaluation of Teaching styles tool reveal that majority of respondents followed Style 1: the all-round flexible and adaptable teaching style. Interestingly, Krishnan et. al. (2020) and Vijayaratnam et.al. (2020) researches prove that teachers followed style 1: the all-round flexible and adaptable teaching style regardless of factors such teachers’ age, mode of teaching, location of institution, subject matter, gender etc. A quantitative study on Blended Learning Teaching Style in the classroom using the Partial Least Squares-Structural Equation modelling (PLS-SEM) by Anthony et.al. (2019) revealed that Blended Learning allowed lecturers to reflect on their teaching styles and beliefs. On the students’
end, they perceived that lecturers were prompt in responding to online enquiries. A further semi- structured interview-style research done by Douglas et al. (2020) looking at the perceptions of students’ engagement as well as facilitators perspectives in using Online Discussion Board from the University of Tasmania revealed that engagement through online discussion boards promoted responsiveness and engagement among students which helped in fostering positive learning experiences.
The significance of external influences on students’ learning styles cannot be underrated. Research on learning styles conducted on more than 1000 university students in Malaysia, Indonesia and China by Sagadavan and John (2019); Lai and Lee (2019) and Lee (2019) highlighted that most learners are visual learners and this could be a new common learning style of digital natives who have benefited from the advancement in the interconnectivity via the internet. The study also revealed that students chose social media as the most favored choice of communication for academic learning and discussion while the email was their least favored choice, supporting the findings of the studies of Zhang et. al. (2019), Yang et. al. (2017) and Lai (2013) on student selection of social media for learning. Furthermore, it is not surprising that the learning styles research by Sagadavan and John (2019) and Lai and Lee (2019) revealed that digital natives prefer informal learning experiences compared to a formal one. Another finding from this research is that students took accountability of their own learning process, although with strong guidance and motivation from the instructors.
The Community of Inquiry (CoI) learning theory by Garrison et.al. (2000) supports and complements Knowlton’s (2000) views and insistence that to be effective, the design of online courses must be approached with student-centered methods. This allows the opportunity for students to broaden their learning beyond teacher control (cognitive presence), teachers serve as coaches (teacher presence), and finally students to be responsible for their academic activity engagement (student presence).
Figure 1: Community of Inquiry (Garrison, Anderson & Archer, 2000)
Studies have been conducted extensively on the Community of Inquiry model and the social constructivism theory to check on learner experiences (Akyol and Garrison, 2008). Finnegan and Ginty (2019) carried out a mixed-mode method study with the use of Moodle, an online learning platform with social constructivism as its core. The focus group was third year Business students in an Irish university. The results indicate that there is a strong correlation between social constructivism and the use of Moodle as through this online learning platform, students were guided in developing their knowledge through lecturers posting the learning outcomes and syllabus content. In addition, there were rooms for interaction between teachers and student through the e- learning platform. This supports the findings of Sagadavan and John (2019) on students taking accountability of their learning with instructors as their coaches/enablers.
2.1 Problem Statement
Although numerous researches have been conducted on online student centered and constructive teaching practices over the years, research findings that illuminate and demystify the process of online instruction are rare. Hence, this research will delve deep into instructors’ real experiences in fully online teaching and learning during the Covid-19 pandemic using key findings from past research as a starting point. A semi-structured open-ended questionnaire is designed to get responses from instructors. This is followed by focus group discussions to delve deeper into instructor experiences as this could further inform the future direction of and practice in virtual instruction.
3. Method 3.1 Participants
Thirty participants, consisting of university lecturers teaching undergraduates from institutions of higher learning in Malaysia were selected at random for this research. They had varying teaching experience which cut across different discipline areas.
3.2. Research Method
A semi structured open ended questionnaire was designed based on the key findings from past research of Lewis and Hamid (2006), Bradford and Wyatt (2010) and Rusly et.al (2020). These were then sent via email to instructors in the various institutions of higher learning. The responses were then analysed for process, meaning and understanding of faculty practices (Merriam, 2016).
Data analysis consisted of identifying and codifying themes through the use of constant comparative method as per Strauss and Corbin (2014). Once the themes were developed, a focus group discussion was held to understand at a deeper level faculty experiences in the online learning realm. Before the focus group, participants were sent a summary of the research findings and a list of questions that will be covered in the focus group.
4. Results and Discussion 4.1 Participant Profile
Of the thirty faculty participants, 20 were teaching the Language and Social Science disciplines and 10 from the Math, Science, Engineering and Accounting disciplines. Six participants had between 1 to 5 years of general teaching experience, ten had 6 to 10 years of teaching experience, twelve had between 10 to 15 years of experience and one had above 24 years of teaching experience. 14 of the 30 participants had online teaching experience of about two years, while the remaining 16 participants had no online teaching experience. For the 14 with online teaching experience, majority had less than two years of online teaching experience. The online platforms used were Blackboard, Blackboard Collaborate Ultra, Microsoft Teams and the Learning Management Systems (LMS) of individual institutions.
4.2 Fostering Interaction online
Fostering a healthy online atmosphere is critically important for student satisfaction and retention given the isolation that arose from the Covid19-pandemic with classes being held remotely. In Garrison et.al. (2000) Community of Enquiry learning theory, online teaching methods which foster in-class interaction among students, between students and instructor and students and content allow students the opportunity to integrate into the culture of the institutions and offer students the opportunity to learn from instructor, content and peers in a meaningful and collaborative process (Garrison, 2000; Knowlton, 2000). In this research, all 30 respondents used student centered teaching and learning strategies to enliven their online classes. They capitalized on the many interactive features on Blackboard, Microsoft Teams and the Learning Management systems of individual institutions to allow interactions to occur synchronously and asynchronously.
4.3 Online learning
4.3.1 During the live class – synchronous learning
Synchronous learning takes place in real time and has a stronger social presence. 90% of respondents surveyed employed popular methods such as ‘ask engaging questions’, ‘online polling’ ‘pop quizzes’, ‘small group activity in breakout groups and ‘short group presentations’
during the synchronous learning sessions. The findings also revealed the importance of ‘providing timely tasks’ and ‘randomly calling out names for students to respond’. To retain student motivation, 15 out of the 30 respondents felt strongly that 50% or more of class time should be centered on activity to support learning. This means in a two-hour class, one hour should be devoted to online activities to engage learners. 26% felt that 30 to 45 minutes should suffice for in-class activity and 6% of respondents devoted less than 30 minutes to the in-class activity. A further 6% felt that this depended on the nature and content of subject respectively. Interestingly, most respondents in the last two groups were in the Business Accounting, Mathematics, Science and Engineering disciplines. The focus group revealed the importance of teacher presence in content based subjects, especially to explain important concepts and to guide students in applying theories in context. Frustration seeps in over-time as aptly mentioned by a participant, “It is clear that after an hour, the energy wears down a bit and this is because teaching and learning online requires a different form of listening, participation and functioning for everyone involved”.
To further engage students, faculty employed learning devices outside the learning management system to augment learning. ‘Youtube’, ‘padlet’ and ‘kahoot’ received more than 70% mentions and the less common ones were ‘pinterest’ and ‘Tedtalks’. Interestingly all respondents agreed that the greatest challenge was the ‘difficulty in maintaining enthusiasm’ amongst students even with using the above tools as “you do not know if they are with you or listening to you.”
4.3.2 Outside live lecture hours – asynchronous learning
The asynchronous online discussion function allows students to interact frequently with each other and the instructor. The discussion forums on Blackboard, Microsoft Teams and other Learning management systems allowed students to take time to thoughtfully compose their responses before posting them online. The use of Wiki in Blackboard and the use of Rooms in MS Teams allowed for students to develop team work and feel as part of a learning community. The tools within these online learning management platforms helped in increasing students’ interest and involvement as they could share knowledge on different topics and increase their motivation and desire to participate. Respondents were positive on the platforms that allowed for ‘one to one consultations’,
‘online forums’, ‘virtual presentations’, ‘self-tests’ and ‘video tutorial with quizzes. The focus group also revealed the amount of support given to students in WeChat and through their online work. Some instructors went the extra mile to pre-record video sessions of 10 minute durations with regular pause points for students to undertake online activity. Instructors were also available after class for student queries. Research evidence drawn by Jones, et.al. (2010); Margaryan, et.al.
(2011) and Mooney (2018) show that students and teachers have their own preferred disruptive technologies to support their learning needs and are not homogenous in the use and appreciation of these new technologies. The focus group supported this view on student preference for disruptive technologies and all instructors made it a point to use social media to supplement the more formal Learning Management System. The most popular medium was WhatsApp, followed by WeChat and Facebook. This also supports Sagadavan and John (2019) findings on student preference for informality in learning environments.
4.4 Feedback
4.4.1 Feedback to students
Feedback is a significant intervention for online educators because it is a prospect to develop the instructor-learner relationship, improve academic performance and enhance learning. Feedback is conceptualized as information provided by an agent (e.g., teachers, peers, books, parent, self, experience) regarding aspects of one’s performance or understanding (Hattie & Timperley, 2007).
Sharing feedback with students in online learning during the pandemic is essential to ensure students’ positive learning development. The cultivation of providing online feedback that is positive and effective enhances the learning experience and is a valuable educator skill (Leibold
& Schwarz, 2015).
Data collected shows all 30 respondents shared prompt and frequent feedback with students using various methods. All of the respondents made full use of the feedback features offered in the online platforms such as Blogs, Wikis, Journal, Discussion Board etc. Focus group revealed that not surprisingly, feedback was also provided via other communication platforms such as WeChat, WhatsApp, Facebook, Telegram etc. for reasons such as immediacy, privacy and assurance that things are rightly done.
4.4.2 Frequency of feedback
Learners are capable to shape their prior understandings through timely and effective feedback received. Nearly half of the respondents surveyed, that is 14 out of 30 respondents said that they shared weekly feedback with students. On average, this was done at least once per week with no exact timing. 11 out of 30 respondents mentioned that they shared frequent feedback with students, with half of them responding that they gave feedback every day or in every live online session.
The remaining 20% of the respondents mentioned that feedback shared were based on students’
requests and while grading online tasks. Giving and requesting for feedback should be part of the overall interaction between teacher and learner, and should not be a one-way communication (McKimm, 2009) as this helps in professionalizing the teaching of lecturers in higher education (Ahea et.al., 2016).
4.4.3 Methods of providing feedback i) Audio/Live feedback
In fully online classes, providing feedback to students can be overwhelming, as there are no opportunities for face-to-face conversations with learners. The use of audio comments through MP3 files and giving feedback during the live interactive sessions have become the new norm.
From data collected, 62.5% of the instructors shared live feedback with learners during the online consultation sessions with the entire class. This was done via discussion of questions on a particular topic. The remaining 37.5% of the instructors mentioned that they conducted live sessions specifically to share feedback with learners who requested for these sessions. In addition to the extra coaching, the teachers’ tone of voice can be motivating for these learners to make improvement in their work (Todd, 2012).
ii) Written feedback
In online learning environments well written and elaborated feedback significantly improves learning outcomes (Aguerrebere, 2018). According to Cavanaugh & Song (2014), it is typical for online instructors to provide comments to students in text form. A total of 22 out of 30 instructors responded that they shared feedback with students via written comments and messages. For effectiveness, the instructors applied various external platforms such as ‘Email’, ‘WhatsApp’,
‘Wechat’ “Facebook’ and ‘Telegram’ to further communicate with and feedback learners.
5. Implications and Conclusion
The Covid-19 pandemic was an accidental and unavoidable disruption that brought the teaching fraternity together to think of novel ways of using technology to transform online teaching and learning, making it a positive learning curve for the community. The various online Learning Management Systems used by institutions have proven to be good supporting platforms to replace the traditional face to face learning during this pandemic. Although learning platforms among institutions differed, this research revealed that there was concerted effort by all instructors to use a structured pedagogical approach revolving around interactivity and action to address student needs. There was evidence of careful planning, organization and creativity in engaging students with the course content and allowing collaboration among peers. This adheres to the Community of Inquiry (CoI) learning theory by Garrison, Anderson and Archer (2000), and Knowlton’s (2000) insistence on student centered methods when designing online course.
In all, the findings reveal that the instructors’ thoughtful use of creative instructional strategies within the constructivist model which was pushed by the dire need of learning continuity in the education sector during the pandemic, has taken teaching innovation to a different level. The voices from faculty revealed novel teaching techniques employed by the instructors, although these techniques came with challenges and frustrations.
Lessons from this research is that instructors must be open to assessing their teaching styles and students’ learning styles to prevent any communication, cognitive and even emotional disconnect between instructor and learner. Future research could delve into active learning strategies that could be employed for online learning specially to overcome the challenges faced by instructors.
One area to focus on is the breaking of silence in the online classroom. Or as put forward by some in the focus group, “Is silence a new learning norm to be expected in the online platform, especially among millennials?” Another aspect that could be looked into is the role of online professional development in preparing instructors for virtual learning which may be the new normal in the near future.
6. Acknowledgement
The researchers would like to thank the respondents for their time in completing the semi- structured online questionnaire and participating in the focus group sessions.
References
Aguerrebere, C., Cabeza, S. G., Kaplan, G., Marconi, C., Cobo, C., & Bulger, M. (2018). Exploring feedback interactions in online learning environments for secondary education. In Proc. of Latin Amer. Workshop on Learn. Analytics 22-137. Retrieved from http://ceur-ws.org/Vol- 2231/LALA_2018_paper_7.pdf
Ahmed, S. D. H., & Mubeen, S. M. (2013). Exploring teaching style in an undergraduate medical college following traditional curriculum in Pakistan. JPMA. The Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association, 63(11), 1409-1414. Retrieved from https://www.jpma.org.pk/PdfDownload/5192
Akyol, Z., Garrison, D.R. (2008). The development of a community of inquiry over time in an online course: understanding the progression and integration of social, cognitive and teaching presence. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12, 3-4. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ837483
Alhussain, A. M. (2012). Identifying Teaching Style: The Case of Saudi College English Language and Literature Teachers. English Language Teaching, 5(8), 122-129.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n8p122
Aliyyah, R. R., Rachmadtullah, R., Samsudin, A., Syaodih, E., Nurtanto, M., & Tambunan, A. R.
S. (2020). The Perceptions of Primary School Teachers of Online Learning during the COVID-19 Pandemic Period: A Case Study in Indonesia. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, 7(2), 90-109. http://dx.doi.org/10.29333/ejecs/388
Anthony, B., Kamaludin, A., Romli, A. et al. (2019) Exploring the role of blended learning for teaching and learning effectiveness in institutions of higher learning: An empirical investigation. Educ Inf Technol, 24, 3433–3466. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09941-z Ahea, M. (2016). The Value and Effectiveness of Feedback in Improving Students' Learning and Professionalizing Teaching in Higher Education. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(16), 38-41. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1105282.pdf
Bradford, G. & Wyatt, S. (2010). Online learning and student satisfaction: Academic standing, ethnicity and their influence on facilitated learning, engagement, and information fluency.
Internet and Higher Education, 13(3), 108-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.02.005 Cavanaugh, A. J., & Song, L. (2014). Audio Feedback versus Written Feedback: Instructors' and Students' Perspectives. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 10(1),122.
Retrieved from https://jolt.merlot.org/vol10no1/cavanaugh_0314.pdf
Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles of good practice in undergraduate
education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3–7. Retrieved from
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED282491.pdf
Chickering, A. W., & Ehrmann, S. C. (1996). Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever. AAHE Bulletin, 49(2), 3–6. Retrieved fromhttp://www.tltgroup.org/seven/home.htm Deng, L., & Tavares, N. J. (2013). From Moodle to Facebook: Exploring students' motivation and
experiences in online communities. Computers & Education, 68, 167-176.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.04.028
Diane Kraal (2017) Legal teaching methods to diverse student cohorts: a comparison between the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand. Cambridge Journal of Education, 47(3), 389-411. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2016.1190315
Douglas, T., James, A., Earwaker, L., Mather, C., & Murray, S. (2020). Online Discussion Boards: Improving Practice and Student Engagement by Harnessing Facilitator Perceptions. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 17(3), 7. Retrieved from http://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp
Farooq, A., Rizwan, S., QureshiS.F., & Hassan, U. (2020). COVID-19 the disruptor; Challenges and opportunities in Medical Education. Isra Med J. 12(1), 34-41. Retrieved from http://www.imj.com.pk/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/9.-RA-45-05-20-Revised-July-18- 2020-D-1-34-41.pdf
Finnegan, M., & Ginty, C. (2019). Moodle and Social Constructivism: Is Moodle Being Used as Constructed? A Case Study Analysis of Moodle Use in Teaching and Learning in an Irish Higher Educational Institute. All Ireland Journal of Higher Education, 11(1). Retrieved from http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9924-8046
Freudenthal Group, Utrecht University and ERME. Retrieved from https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10077723
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment:
Computer conferencing in higher education. The internet and higher education, 2(2-3), 87- 105.https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
Getzlaf, B., Perry, B., Toffner, G., Lamarche, K., & Edwards, M. (2009). Effective instructor feedback: Perceptions of online Graduate students. Journal of Educators Online, 6(2), n2.
Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ904070.pdf
Ghavifekr, S., & Rosdy, W. A. W. (2015). Teaching and learning with technology: Effectiveness of ICT integration in schools. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 1(2), 175-191. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1105224.pdf Hattie, J., & Timperly, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1),
81-112. Retrieved from http://www.columbia.edu/~mvp19/ETF/Feedback.pdf
Jones, C., Ramanau, R., Cross, S., & Healing, G. (2010). Net generation or Digital Natives: Is there a distinct new generation entering university? Computers & education, 54(3), 722-732.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.022
Knowlton, D. S. (2000). A theoretical framework for the online classroom: A defense and delineation of a student‐centered pedagogy. New directions for teaching and learning, 2000(84), 5-14. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.841
Knapp, N. F. (2019). The shape activity: Social constructivism in the psychology classroom. Teaching of Psychology, 46(1), 87-91. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0098628318816181
Knowlton, D. S. (2000). A theoretical framework for the online classroom: A defense and delineation of a student‐centered pedagogy. New directions for teaching and learning, 2000(84), 5-14. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.841
Krishnan, S., Vijayaratnam, P., & John, S. (2020). An Investigation on How Mode of Teaching, Location of Educational Institution and Teacher’s Age Affect Teaching Style. International Journal of Advanced Research in Education and Society, 2(1), 107-115. [is there a DOI for this]
Lai, M.O, (2013) The Use of Facebook to Supplement Classroom Teaching International Journal for e-Learning Security (IJeLS), 3(1), 270-279. Retrieved from https://infonomics- society.org/wp-content/uploads/ijels/published-papers/volume-3-2013/The-Use-of-
Facebook-to-Supplement-Classroom-Teaching.pdf
Lai, Y. L., & Lee, J. (2019). Trend of Internet Usage and Learning Style of Digital Natives. PUPIL: International Journal of Teaching, Education and Learning, 3(2).
https://doi.org/10.20319/pijtel.2019.32.94102
Lee, J. (2019). Learning Preferences and Experiences in Different Environments. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 7(9): 1933-1937. [is there a DOI for this]
Leibold, N & Schwarz, L.M (2015). The Art of Giving Online Feedback. The Journal of Effective Teaching. 15(1), 34-46. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1060438.pdf Lewis, C. C., & Abdul-Hamid, H. (2006). Implementing effective online teaching practices:
Voices of exemplary faculty. Innovative Higher Education, 31(2),83- 98.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-006-9010-z
Rusly, N. H. M., Abd Aziz, A., & Ngadiron, S. A CASE STUDY ON THE APPLICATION OF WEB-BASED BLENDED LEARNING. Management, 5(17), 20-27. Retrieved from http://www.jistm.com/PDF/JISTM-2020-17-06-03.pdf
Marhan, A. M. (2006). Connectivism: Concepts and principles for emerging learning networks.
In The 1 st Conference on Virtual Learning. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/241897939_Connectivism_Concepts_and_Principl es_for_emerging_Learning_Networks
McKimm, J. (2009). Giving effective feedback. British Journal of Hospital Medicine
(2005), 70(3), 158-161. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/24189288_Giving_Effective_Feedback
Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., & Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies. Computers & education, 56(2), 429-440.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.09.004
Merriam, S.B. (2016). Qualitative research and case study application in education (4th ed.). San Francisco,CA:Jossey-Bass.
Mooney, E. B. (2018). Intentional Teaching with Technology. The Mathematics Teacher,.111(4), 264–271. https://doi.org/10.5951/mathteacher.111.4.0264
Picciano, A. G. (2017). Theories and frameworks for online education: Seeking an integrated model. Online Learning, 21(3), 166-190. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i3.1225
Sagadavan, R & John, S (2019). Gap Refinement of Teaching and Learning Practice in Digital Era Via Informal Guidance. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT). 8(35) [is there a website or doi]
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J.(2014) Basics of qualitative research (4th ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Todd, G. (2012). Talking Beats Writing. Educational Leadership, 70(1). Retrieved from https://scholar.google.com/scholar?output=instlink&q=info:LD-
6_f8gMu8J:scholar.google.com/&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&scillfp=8124841887472274850&oi=ll e
UNESCO’s policy statement: COVID-19 and higher education: Today and tomorrow (2020).
UNESCO International Institute for Higher Education in Latin America and the Caribbean (UNESCO IESALC). Retrieved from http://www.iesalc.unesco.org/en/wp-content/uploads/
Vijayaratnam, P, John, S & Krishnan, S (2020) An Investigation on how Gender Qualifications, Years of Teaching Service, Program Level, Type of Program Taught and Academic Rank Affect Teaching Style. [Paper Presentation] Proceedings of ISERD International Conference, New York, USA, 16th – 17th July, 2020. International Conference, Institute for Technology and Research (ITRESEARCH)
Yang, Y., Wang, Q., Woo, H. L., & Quek, C. L. (2017). Using Facebook for teaching and learning:
a review of the literature. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life Long Learning, 21(1), 72-86. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJCEELL.2011.039695
Zhang, L., Wu, Y., Qian, X., Lv, P., & Zhou, X. (2019). Analysis on WeChat-Based Blended Learning in Network Marketing Course. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 14(17), 86-101.https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i17.11277
