A Systematic Review on Pedagogical Trends and Assessment Practices during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Teachers’ and Students’ Perspectives

Ibna Seraj, Prodhan Mahbub; Chakraborty, Roti; Mehdi, Tareque; Roshid, M. Moninoor

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/1534018

Education Research International

On this page

Abstract Introduction Results Discussion Limitations Data Availability Conflicts of Interest References Copyright Related Articles

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2022 | Article ID 1534018 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/1534018

A Systematic Review on Pedagogical Trends and Assessment Practices during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Teachers’ and Students’ Perspectives

Prodhan Mahbub Ibna Seraj,¹Roti Chakraborty,²Tareque Mehdi,³and M. Moninoor Roshid^4,5

Academic Editor: Ehsan Rezvani

Received08 Nov 2021

Accepted22 Feb 2022

Published01 Apr 2022

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a wide range of effects on education at all levels worldwide. After an unexpected, emergency and forced move from face-to-face to online platform for teaching-learning and assessment, teachers and learners were left scrambling to adjust and adapt. Concerning the importance of the above matters, this systematic review paper would investigate different aspects of online pedagogical trends and online assessment practice from the teachers’ and students’ perspectives during the COVID-19 pandemic in the existing literature conducted from March 2020 to April 2021. For this purpose, 45 studies of 33.864 research studies were collected from the database of ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Web of Science and analyzed herewith. For inclusion and exclusion of studies, the guidelines of the PRISMA model were followed. The results show that there are 18 different advantages of online learning, 28 challenges of online learning, 15 different purposes of shifting to online learning, and 14 different platforms used for online learning under different aspects of online pedagogical trends. For online assessment practice, 5 different types of assessment and 15 challenges of implementing online assessment are found. The study's ramifications for online teaching and learning and assessment are examined. There are also suggestions for future research.

1. Introduction

COVID-19, a contagious virus, spread worldwide, wreaking havoc on all aspects of human life. Though it began as a health catastrophe, it has had a significant impact on other areas such as policy, economy, business, communication, tourism, and education. One of the most important effects of the pandemic is on education. According to United Nations (2020), the COVID-19 pandemic has wreaked havoc on education on a scale never seen before. By the middle of 2020, the pandemic would have impacted 94% of students globally. This equates to 1.58 billion children and youth in 200 nations, ranging from preprimary to higher education. When the pandemic spread around the world at the beginning of 2020, state governments suspended face-to-face campus-based teaching and learning activities in schools, colleges, and universities to curve its spread and save human lives. However, to keep educational activities ongoing, many educational institutions began to deploy technology to promote distance education, remote learning, and online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, following the government's decision.

While online teaching is commonly known and practised, emergency remote teaching (ERT) is relatively new in many parts of the world. Online teaching is initially planned and prepared to be provided virtually. By contrast, emergency remote teaching is a quick interim transition of instructional delivery to an online delivery mode due to a major disaster. ERT entails the full use of remote teaching tools to offer curriculum or educational resources that would otherwise be delivered physically or as hybrid or blended courses [1]. When educational institutions started ERT, in many cases, neither the teachers nor the students had been prepared for remote teaching with institutionally supported technologies. However, several institutions have made it mandatory for teachers to offer online sessions using open-source online educational platforms such as WhatsApp, YouTube, Skype, and Facebook [2].

Increasingly over the last one and half years, numerous papers have been published highlighting the changes in education as a consequence of the spread of the pandemic. Most of the articles have focused on pedagogy [3–5], the well-being of the learners/teachers [6], challenges [2, 7–9], and so on. For instance, Joshi, Vinay, and Bhaskar [2] used the interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) to identify the challenges experienced by teachers during online teaching and evaluation in various home environmental settings in India. Teachers confront four types of obstacles during online teaching and assessment, according to the research. Significant difficulties included a lack of basic facilities, external distraction, and family disruption. Personal issues among teachers included a lack of passion and technical understanding. Aliyyah et al. [10] investigated primary school teachers' perspectives of online learning in a program created in Indonesia during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were gathered from 67 primary school teachers via surveys and semi-structured interviews. The findings revealed four primary themes: teaching tactics, difficulties, support, and teacher motivation. Using a qualitative methodology, Shamir-Inbal and Blau [11] looked into teacher experience leading emergency remote teaching (ERT) in K-12 to better understand the pedagogical, technological, and organizational obstacles and benefits of computer-augmented digital learning settings. Teachers used a variety of pedagogical remote learning tactics, according to the findings. The study emphasizes the importance of turning a curse into a blessing by regularly adding remote technology-enhanced learning and online activities into the school agenda. Ghasem and Ghannam [12] evaluated the impact of distance learning on chemical engineering students' educational performance at United Arab Emirates University during the pandemic period based on a survey and observations. Overall, the students who took part in the study had no major technical difficulties in completing all of the online exercises. During the online sessions, the majority of the students who participated experienced difficulty concentrating.

Nevertheless, there are few review studies found in existing literature during COVID-19 on the aspects of teaching and assessment through online practices. Kumar et al. [13] presented a review study discussing the various aspects of modern technology used to fight against the COVID-19 crisis at different scales, including medical image processing, disease tracking, prediction outcomes, computational biology, and medicines. Carrillo and Flores [14] provided a review of the literature on online teaching and learning practices in teacher education. Regmi and Jones [15] identified positive and negative factors that affect e-learning in health sciences education (el-HSE) in the medical literature. Again, Gamage et al. [16] reviewed the security of digital assessments, as well as the issues related to academic integrity. Thus, there is an explicit knowledge gap to investigate different issues of pedagogical trends, e.g., reasons for shifting online teaching, online teaching platforms, advantages, challenges, and online assessment practices during the COVID-19 pandemic.

For this purpose, studies that addressed the educational issues related to either country-specific or subject-specific or particular education level-specific empirical studies from teachers' or students' perspectives during the COVID-19 pandemic were under consideration of this study. Against this backdrop, reviewing empirical research articles systematically, the purpose of this study was to explore the following two research questions:(1)What are the aspects of pedagogical trends in emergency remote teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic?(2)What assessment practices are inculcated in emergency remote teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic?

The above two research questions have been explored from teachers' and students' perspectives based on a systematic literature review.

2. Methodology

The methodology of this study is based on the guidelines of the PRISMA model [17, 18] for conducting a systematic literature review. The guidelines consist of a method of literature review of available research studies found on the online pedagogical trends and assessment practices during the COVID-19 pandemic.

2.1. Study Searching and Inclusion Process

The searching and inclusion process of this study is based on the guidelines of the PRISMA model [18]. For selecting studies on the online pedagogical trends and assessment practices during the COVID-19 pandemic, the researchers have gone through the renowned global databases such as Web of Science, Scopus, and ScienceDirect from March 2020 to April 2021. The key search words were assessment and COVID-19, teaching and COVID-19, online leaning and COVID-19, and education and COVID-19. 33.864 research studies were identified in total in the databases mentioned above. The majority of them were discovered on ScienceDirect (11,210), followed by Scopus (10.310) and Web of Science (9528). Following a careful evaluation of the study types, their titles and abstracts, and the possibility of duplication, 127 papers were retained for full-text analysis, of which only 45 satisfied the established criteria. The inclusion and exclusion criteria are as follows:(i)The studies published between March 2020 and April 2021(ii)The studies that dealt with online teaching and learning practices during the COVID-19 pandemic(iii)The studies that dealt with online assessment practices in education during the COVID-19 pandemic(iv)The studies that investigated teachers’ and learners’ perspectives(v)The studies that were only conducted on the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on teaching and learning(vi)Only journal articles were under consideration(vii)Only empirical studies were under consideration(viii)Those studies conducted in the English language

2.2. Analysis Process

Figure 1 presents the analysis process of this study in response to each research question. Selected studies were 45 in total in alignment with the objectives of this study. These 45 studies were put into Zotero, the reference management software for making online database and studying part by part by the researchers. After screening through the Zotero database, all the selected studies (N = 45) were exported from Zotero as ris.file to import into NVivo. NVivo 12 version, the qualitative data analysis software, was used to build themes in response to the researcher questions. After securing themes as per research questions, the researchers exported the list of themes with the number of nodes (n) as an excel sheet. This excel sheet was imported into SPSS 25, the quantitative data analysis software for descriptive analysis. On the basis of the 50th quartile point, the results of this study were presented.

To present the findings, at first, under each major theme, we converted the individual observation number of each subtheme into a percentage compared with both total sample article numbers, N = 45, and total observation numbers of that respective major theme (n). Then, the 50th quartiles for each major theme have been calculated again based on both N = 45 and n. We found that, in both cases, the 50th quartiles divide the subthemes into the higher and lower parts similarly. Thus, finally, based on the 50th quartiles, for each major theme, we categorized our findings of subthemes into the higher group (above 50th quartile)—factors that have been identified and discussed most frequently, and the lower group (from the 50th quartile to below)—factors that have been identified and discussed less frequently.

3. Results

Table 1 presents the summary of the reviewed studies (n = 45). The results show that all the studies deal on two issues, e.g., pedagogical trends and assessment practice through online teaching platform during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Of 45 studies, the majority of the studies were conducted through the quantitative research design (n = 21). The qualitative research design was employed in 15 studies (n = 15), and rest of 9 studies were conducted through the mixed-methods research design. The majority of the studies used survey questionnaire. These studies dealt with teachers (n = 14), students (n = 21), teacher-students (n = 7), teachers-students-educators (n = 1), teachers-parents (n = 1), and teachers-students-administrators (n = 1).

3.1. RQ1: Pedagogical Trends

In response to research question 1, of 45 articles, for the pedagogical trends, the findings explored 40% of discussions on the advantages (n = 18), 62.22% on the challenges faced (n = 28), 33.33% on the purposes of shifting (n = 15), and 31.11% on the platforms used (n = 14) for online teaching-learning (Table 2).

For our first research question, “What are the aspects of the pedagogical trends in emergency remote teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic?” we described the findings based on four major themes—advantages of online learning, challenges of online learning, purposes of shifting to online learning, and platforms used for online learning.

3.1.1. Major Theme 1: Advantages of Online Learning

Table 3 presents the 50th quartile values of the major theme, namely, advantages of online teaching.

Table 4 shows a total of 18 subthemes (n = 18) that have been identified as advantages for our first major theme, “Advantages of Online Learning,” where the 50th quartile = 0.033. Therefore, among these 18 advantages, teachers’-students’ positive experience (13%), cost-saving (7%), flexible learning (7%), time-saving (7%), collaborative learning (4%), conducive learning (4%), effectiveness (4%), good medium (4%), and synchronous teaching methods (4%) are the upper-level subthemes. On the other hand, academic support (2%), freedom in learning (2%), manageable (2%), safety (2%), self-directed learning (2%), student-centeredness (2%), synchronous and asynchronous (2%), timely response from teachers (2%), and ubiquitous learning (2%) belong to the lower group.

3.1.2. Major Theme 2: Challenges of Online Learning

Table 5 presents the 50th quartile values of the major theme, namely, challenges of online learning.

Table 6 presents subthemes related to the second major theme, “Challenges of Online Learning,” and we have identified a total of 18 subthemes (n = 18) as challenges, where the 50th quartile = 0.033. Among these 28 challenges, course integration with technology (24%), Internet issues (24%), lack of interaction (13%), lack of technical infrastructure (20%), lack of devices (9%), lack of training (9%), lack of motivation (9%), external distraction (7%), lack of time management (7%), lack of online teaching knowledge (7%), increase workload (4%), lack of organizational preparedness (4%), limited communication (4%), and not having equal chance of learning (4%) are of the higher-group subthemes. However, confusing messages (2%), difficult to manage class schedule (2%), expensive (2%), and eye straining (2%) are of the lower-group subthemes.

3.1.3. Major Theme 3: Purposes of Shifting to Online Learning

Table 7 presents the 50th quartile values of the major theme, namely purposes of shifting to online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic.

We have identified a total of 15 subthemes (n = 15) as purposes for our third major theme, “Purposes of Shifting to Online Learning,” where the 50th quartile = 0.022 (Table 8). Among these 15 purposes, emergency remote teaching (ERT) transitions (11%), facilitating conditions (9%), hedonic motivation (4%), moving with agility (4%), and social influence (4%) belong to the upper group, but effect expectancy (2%), entering “disembodied spaces” (2%), facilitating leadership (2%), multiple digital protocols (2%), navigating larger groups (2%), performance expectancy (2%), price value (2%), project team capability (2%), regulator’s support (2%), and transferring to home working (2%) belong to the lower group.

3.1.4. Major Theme 4: Platforms Used for Online Learning

Table 9 presents the 50th quartile values of the major theme, namely platforms used for online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic.

We have identified a total of 14 subthemes (n = 14) as platforms for our fourth major theme, “Platforms Used for Online Learning,” where the 50th quartile = 0.022 (Table 10). Among these 14 purposes, Zoom (16%), learning management system (7%), Google Classroom (4%), Microsoft Teams (4%), and WhatsApp (4%) are the frequently used platforms, whereas Chegg (2%), Discussion Forum (2%), email (2%), Facebook (2%), Google Hangouts (2%), Learning Central (2%), Teleconferencing Software (2%), Telegram (2%), and telephone (2%) are of the lower group.

Then, to describe our second research question, “What assessment practices are inculcated in emergency remote teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic?” we categorized our findings into two major themes—types of assessment in online learning and challenges of assessment in online learning.

3.2. RQ2: Online Assessment

In response to research question 2, for the assessment practices, 11.11% of the discussions were found on the assessment types (n = 5) and 33.33% on the challenges faced (n = 15) (Table 11).

3.2.1. Major Theme 1: Types of Assessment in Online Learning

Table 12 presents the 50th quartile values of the major theme, namely types of assessment in online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In the first major theme, “Types of Assessment in Online learning,” a total of five subthemes (n = 5) have been identified where the 50th quartile = 0.022 (Table 13). Among these five assessment types, remote online delivery (4%) and time-limited remote examinations (4%) belong to the upper group. On the other hand, automated student-centered assessment (2%), interim presentation (2%), and video assessment (2%) belong to the lower group.

3.2.2. Major Theme 2: Challenges of Assessment in Online Learning

Table 14 presents the 50th quartile values of the major theme, namely challenges of assessment in online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic.

For our second major theme, “Challenges of Assessment in Online Learning,” a total of 15 subthemes (n = 15) have been identified as challenges, where the 50th quartile = 0.022 (Table 15). Among these 15 challenges of assessment in online learning, lack of preparedness (7%), lack of students’ interest (7%), challenging online assessment (4%), facilitating cheat (4%), importing marking system (4%), lack of students’ mental preparedness (4%), dissatisfactory examination system (4%), and limited time (4%) are upper-level subthemes. However, external distraction (2%), family interference (2%), Internet issue (2%), item leakage (2%), lack of government’s preparedness (2%), limited resources (2%), and test anxiety (2%) are the lower-level subthemes.

4. Discussion

The themes related to the different aspects of pedagogical trends and assessments during pandemic were categorized into the upper and lower groups. Those who had high frequency within these studies fell into the upper group, and those who had low frequency were put into the lower group.

4.1. RQ1: Pedagogical Trend

In response to research question 1, there were four identified aspects of the pedagogical trends of online teaching during COVID-19 such as advantages of online learning, challenges of online learning, purposes of shifting to online learning, and platforms used for online learning.

Under the theme of advantages of online teaching, there were 18 different types of advantages found. The most frequent advantages were teachers’-students’ positive experience, cost-saving, flexible learning, time-saving, collaborative learning, conducive learning, effectiveness, good medium, and synchronous teaching methods. Teachers-students’ positive experience was the most important advantage. On the other hand, academic support, freedom in learning, manageable, safety, self-directed learning, student-centeredness, synchronous and asynchronous, timely response from teachers, and ubiquitous learning were in the group of least frequent group.

From the perspectives of challenges of implementing online as a pedagogical trend, there were 28 different issues. Course integration with technology, Internet issues, lack of interaction, lack of technical infrastructure, lack of devices, lack of training, and lack of motivation was the most prominent. Course integration with technology was the most frequent problem of applying online teaching pedagogy during the COVID-19 pandemic, whereas confusing messages, difficult to manage class schedule, expensive, and eye straining were found under the least frequent group.

The rationale behind shifting to online learning was 15 different types. Among them, emergency remote teaching (ERT) transitions, facilitating conditions, hedonic motivation, moving with agility, and social influence were the prominent. On the other hand, effect expectancy, entering “disembodied spaces,” facilitating leadership, multiple digital protocols, navigating larger groups, performance expectancy, price value, project team capability, regulator’s support, and transferring to home working were dealt less in these studies.

For using platforms for teaching online, there were 14 different types of tools were found. Among these 14 platforms, Zoom, learning management system, Google Classroom, Microsoft Teams, and WhatsApp were the frequently used platforms. The most used platform was Zoom, whereas, Chegg, Discussion Forum, email, Facebook, Google Hangouts, Learning Central, Teleconferencing Software, Telegram, and telephone were the least used platforms.

4.2. RQ-2: Assessment Practice

In response to the assessment practice, 5 different types of online assessment were found. Among these, remote online delivery and time-limited remote examinations were used most, whereas automated student-centered assessment, interim presentation, and video assessment were used less frequently.

15 different types of challenges were found to conduct online assessment practice. Among these 15 challenges of assessment in online learning, lack of preparedness, lack of students’ interest, challenging online assessment, facilitating cheat, importing marking system, lack of students’ mental preparedness, dissatisfactory examination system, and limited time had high frequency. On the other hand, external distraction, family interference, Internet issue, item leakage, lack of government’s preparedness, limited resources, and test anxiety had the least frequency.

The findings of this study in response to research questions 1and 2 are different from the existing review studies. For example, Kumar et al. [13] presented a review study discussing the various aspects of modern technology used to fight against COVID-19 crisis at different scales, including medical image processing, disease tracking, prediction outcomes, computational biology, and medicines. Secondly, Carrillo and Flores [14] provided a review of the literature on online teaching and learning practices in teacher education. Thirdly, Regmi and Jones [15] identified the positive and negative factors that affect e-learning in health sciences education (el-HSE) in the medical literature. Finally, Gamage et al. [16] reviewed the security of digital assessments, as well as the issues related to academic integrity.

5. Further Research and Limitations

This study has made shreds of evidence that some areas of research deserve further attention. First, more attention needs to be paid to practical strategies for equitable distance learning that should be considered during and beyond emergency remote teaching (see also [61]). Although this study has highlighted the issues related to online pedagogy that were likely to lead to teaching and learning impact, these were not the primary focus of the studies examined. Second, more attention needs to be directed towards the pedagogical underlying issues leading to universities to facilitate adoption, acceptance, and use of online teaching during a healthcare emergency leading to campus lockdowns or the imposition of restrictions on the physical movement of people [35]. Concentration should be on incorporating principles into the course that could be applied and/or modified to increase students’ engagement and performance [20, 62]. Moreover, developing state of Internet connectivity, adequate training, and workshop on the usage of e-learning should be emphasized to optimize the maximum benefits of e-learning [63].

In regard to assessment, the process used during the COVID-19 pandemic may remain in the post-pandemic context, so test developers need to pay attention to using technologically delivered assessments for delivering construct representative in the new era of technology-driven language assessments [64]. Further research needs to be carried out for evaluating automated student-centered assessment tool for learners’ evaluation in any context to minimize the absence of physical examinations [52, 65]. Additional research can be carried out to investigate post-examination living experiences of learners to formulate an online assessment system for any context in the globe [50]. More focus needs to be placed on procedural support, resourcing and preparation in raising awareness and disseminating information on academic integrity policy, practices, expectations, disciplinary action, and developmental tools to mitigate academic misconduct for online assessment [21].

Moreover, this study has reviewed the literature on different issues, e.g., advantages, challenges, shifting rationale, online platforms of pedagogical trends, and assessment challenges and practices synthesized in the existing literature during the COVID-19 pandemic in the area of teaching and learning. However, due to a large number of studies under examination and the constraints in terms of word limitation, this study has focused on the most common themes or characteristics that have been determined to be the most relevant for this study and has left out several essential concerns, e.g., impacts of COVID-19 pandemic on learners’ physical and mental health and academic performance. Further, a review study can highlight these issues to present a complete scenario of online pedagogy in education from the global perspectives.

Data Availability

No empirical data were used for this study. Only published articles were used for this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

N. Mohamad Nasri, H. Husnin, S. N. D. Mahmud, and L. Halim, “Mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic: a snapshot from Malaysia into the coping strategies for pre-service teachers' education,” Journal of Education for Teaching, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 546–553, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Joshi, M. Vinay, and P. Bhaskar, “Impact of coronavirus pandemic on the Indian education sector: perspectives of teachers on online teaching and assessments,” Interactive Technology and Smart Education, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 205–226, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Mahmood, “Instructional strategies for online teaching in COVID-19 pandemic,” Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 199–203, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. P. A. Murphy, “COVID-19 and emergency ELearning: consequences of the securitization of higher education for post-pandemic pedagogy,” Contemporary Security Policy, vol. 41, pp. 1–14, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. D. Oyedotun, “Sudden change of pedagogy in education driven by COVID-19: perspectives and evaluation from a developing country,” Research in Globalization, vol. 2, no. September, Article ID 100029, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. H. Dodd, K. Dadaczynski, O. Okan, K. J. McCaffery, and K. Pickles, “Psychological wellbeing and academic experience of university students in Australia during covid-19,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 1–12, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Hashemi, “Online teaching experiences in higher education institutions of Afghanistan during the COVID-19 outbreak: challenges and opportunities,” Cogent Arts and Humanities, vol. 8, no. 1, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Karalis and N. Raikou, “Teaching at the times of COVID-19: inferences and implications for higher education pedagogy,” International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 10, no. 5, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Khan, M. Hasinur, and H. Ahmed, “COVID-19 outbreak situations in Bangladesh: an empirical analysis,” medRxiv, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. R. Aliyyah, R. Reza, S. Achmad et al., “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, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 90–109, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
T. Shamir-Inbal and I. Blau, “Facilitating emergency remote K-12 teaching in computing-enhanced virtual learning environments during COVID-19 pandemic - blessing or curse?” Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 59, pp. 1–29, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Ghasem and M. Ghannam, “Challenges, benefits & drawbacks of chemical engineering on-line teaching during Covid-19 pandemic,” Education for Chemical Engineers, vol. 36, pp. 107–114, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Kumar, P. K. Gupta, and A. Srivastava, “A review of modern technologies for tackling COVID-19 pandemic,” Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research Reviews, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 569–573, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Carrillo and M. A. Flores, “COVID-19 and teacher education: a literature review of online teaching and learning practices,” European Journal of Teacher Education, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 466–487, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Regmi and L. Jones, “A systematic review of the factors - enablers and barriers - affecting e-learning in health sciences education,” BMC Medical Education, vol. 20, no. 1, p. 91, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. A. A. Gamage, K. Erandika, and G. Nanda, “Online delivery and assessment during COVID-19: safeguarding academic integrity,” Education Sciences, vol. 10, no. 11, pp. 1–24, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. Seraj, P. Mahbub, and H. Habil, “A systematic overview of issues for developing EFL learners ’ oral English communication skills,” Journal of Language and Education, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 229–240, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Moher, A. Liberati, J. Tetzlaff, and D. G. Altman, “Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement,” PLoS Medicine, vol. 6, no. 7, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Code, R. Ralph, and K. Forde, “Pandemic designs for the future: perspectives of technology education teachers during COVID-19,” Information and Learning Science, vol. 121, no. 5–6, pp. 409–421, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Khatoony and M. Nezhadmehr, “EFL teachers’ challenges in integration of technology for online classrooms during coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic in Iran,” AJELP: Asian Journal of English Language and Pedagogy, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 89–104, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
N. Peimani and H. Kamalipour, “Online education and the COVID-19 outbreak: a case study of online teaching during lockdown,” Education Sciences, vol. 11, no. 2, p. 72, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Watermeyer, T. Crick, C. Knight, and J. Goodall, “COVID-19 and digital disruption in UK universities: afflictions and affordances of emergency online migration,” Higher Education, vol. 81, no. 3, pp. 623–641, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Akhter, “Problems and challenges faced by EFL students of Saudi arabia during COVID-19 pandemic,” Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 1–7, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. L. Hadar, B. Alpert, and T. Ariav, “The response of clinical practice curriculum in teacher education to the covid-19 breakout: a case study from Israel,” Prospects, vol. 51, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. M. Cutri, J. Mena, and E. F. Whiting, “Faculty readiness for online crisis teaching: transitioning to online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic,” European Journal of Teacher Education, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 523–541, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. Kidd and J. Murray, “The covid-19 pandemic and its effects on teacher education in england: how teacher educators moved practicum learning online,” European Journal of Teacher Education, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 542–558, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Cleland, J. McKimm, R. Fuller, D. Taylor, J. Janczukowicz, and T. Gibbs, “Adapting to the impact of COVID-19: sharing stories, sharing practice,” Medical Teacher, vol. 42, no. 7, pp. 772–775, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Rapanta, L. Botturi, P. Goodyear, L. Guàrdia, and M. Koole, “Online university teaching during and after the covid-19 crisis: refocusing teacher presence and learning activity,” Postdigital Science and Education, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 923–945, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. König, D. J. Jäger-Biela, and N. Glutsch, “Adapting to online teaching during COVID-19 school closure: teacher education and teacher competence effects among early career teachers in Germany,” European Journal of Teacher Education, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 608–622, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. A. K. Basuony, R. EmadEldeen, M. Farghaly, N. El-Bassiouny, K. Ehab, and A. Mohamed, “The factors affecting student satisfaction with online education during the COVID-19 pandemic: an empirical study of an emerging muslim country,” Journal of Islamic Marketing, vol. 12, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Sulaiman, A. Ibrahim, S. Motevalli, K. Y. Wong, and M. Nazrul Hakim, “Effect of e-evaluation on work motivation among teachers during the movement control order in COVID-19: the mediating role of stress,” Interactive Technology and Smart Education, vol. 18, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Elsalem, N. Al-Azzam, A. A. Jum'ah, and N. Obeidat, “Remote E-exams during Covid-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study of students' preferences and academic dishonesty in faculties of medical sciences,” Annals of Medicine and Surgery, vol. 62, pp. 326–333, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Dyki, M. Singorahardjo, and S. Valeria, “Preparing graduates with the employability skills for the unknown future: reflection on assessment practice during COVID-19,” Accounting Research Journal, vol. 34, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Tan, “The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on student learning performance from the perspectives of community of inquiry,” Corporate Governance, vol. 21, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Mittal, A. Mantri, U. Tandon, and K. D. Yogesh, “A unified perspective on the adoption of online teaching in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Information Discovery and Delivery, 2020, https://files/111/10-1108_IDD-09-2020-0114.pdf.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Abbasi, T. Ayoob, A Malik, and S. I. Memon, “Perceptions of students regarding E-learning during covid-19 at a private medical college,” Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, vol. 36, pp. S57–S66, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Piyatamrong, J. Derrick, and N. Abel, “Technology-mediated higher education provision during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative assessment of engineering student experiences and sentiments,” Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, vol. 34, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. J. Bhute, J. Campbell, A. Kogelbauer, U. V. Shah, and C. Brechtelsbauer, “Moving to timed remote assessments: the impact of COVID-19 on year end exams in chemical engineering at imperial college london,” Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 97, no. 9, pp. 2760–2767, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. T. T. Ho, S. Sivapalan, H. H. Pham, T. M. N. Lan, T. V. P. Anh, and V. D. Hung, “Students’ Adoption of e-learning in Emergency Situation: The case of a Vietnamese University during COVID-19,” Interactive Technology And Smart Education, vol. 18, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. M. V. Wyk, “Academic support under COVID-19 lockdown: what students think of online support e-tools in an ODeL course,” Interactive Technology and Smart Education, vol. 13, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Joshi, “Rising importance of remote learning in India in the wake of COVID-19: issues, challenges and way forward,” World Journal of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 44–63, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Izumi, V. Sukhwani, A. Surjan, and R. Shaw, “Managing and responding to pandemics in higher educational institutions: initial learning from COVID-19,” International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 51–66, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Ilias, N. Baidi, E. K. Ghani, and F. M. Razali, “Issues on the use of online learning: an exploratory study among university students during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Universal Journal of Educational Research, vol. 8, no. 11, pp. 5092–5105, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. A. Ahmed, N. N. Hegazy, H. W. Abdel Malak et al., “Model for utilizing distance learning post COVID-19 using (PACT)^TM a cross sectional qualitative study,” BMC Medical Education, vol. 20, no. 1, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Bashitialshaaer, M. Alhendawi, and Z. Lassoued, “Obstacle comparisons to achieving distance learning and applying electronic exams during COVID-19 pandemic,” Symmetry, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 99, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Emetarom and O. Mayowa-Adebara, “Online platforms used for teaching and learning during the COVID-19 era: the case of LIS students in delta state university, abraka,” The International Information & Library Review, pp. 1–36, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Jacques, A. Ouahabi, and T. Lequeu, “Remote knowledge acquisition and assessment during the COVID-19 pandemic,” International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy (iJEP), vol. 10, no. 6, p. 120, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Halaweh, “Are universities using the right assessment tools during the pandemic and crisis times?” Higher Learning Research Communications, vol. 11, no. 0, pp. 1–9, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Lancaster and C. Cotarlan, “Contract cheating by stem students through a file sharing website: a covid-19 pandemic perspective,” International Journal for Educational Integrity, vol. 17, no. 1, p. 3, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Roy and A. Roy, “Conducting examinations in India: emergency, contention and challenges of students amidst covid-19 pandemic,” Children and Youth Services Review, vol. 120, Article ID 105768, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. H.-J. Chen, “Developing an OER website and analyzing its use during the COVID-19 pandemic,” English Teaching and Learning, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 451–461, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Barra, S. López-Pernas, A. Alonso, J. F. Sánchez-Rada, A. Gordillo, and J. Quemada, “Automated assessment in programming courses: a case study during the COVID-19 era,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 18, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Y. Almomani, A. M. Qablan, F. Y. Atrooz, A. M. Almomany, R. M. Hajjo, and H. Y. Almomani, “The influence of coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the quarantine practices on university students' beliefs about the online learning experience in Jordan,” Frontiers in Public Health, vol. 8, Article ID 595874, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Hussein, S. Daoud, H. Alrabaiah, and R. Badawi, “Exploring undergraduate students' attitudes towards emergency online learning during COVID-19: a case from the UAE,” Children and Youth Services Review, vol. 119, no. August, Article ID 105699, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Cairns, “Exams tested by covid-19: an opportunity to rethink standardized senior secondary examinations,” Prospects, vol. 51, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. N. Garcia, S. J. Whitener, A. Ghassemi et al., “The periodontal senior case clinical challenge: students’ opinions of A formative virtual assessment during the COVID‐19 emergency,” European Journal of Dental Education, vol. 25, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Jaap, A. Dewar, C. Duncan, K. Fairhurst, D. Hope, and D. Kluth, “Effect of remote online exam delivery on student experience and performance in applied knowledge tests,” BMC Medical Education, vol. 21, no. 1, p. 86, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Rameez, M. A. M. Fowsar, and N. Lumna, “Impact of covid-19 on higher education sectors in Sri Lanka: a study based on south eastern university of Sri Lanka,” Journal of Educational and Social Research, vol. 10, no. 6, p. 341, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Tejedor, L. Cervi, A. Pérez-Escoda, F. Tusa, and A. Parola, “Higher education response in the time of coronavirus: perceptions of teachers and students, and open innovation,” Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 43, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Yıldırım, “Preschool education in Turkey during the covid-19 pandemic: a phenomenological study,” Early Childhood Education Journal, vol. 49, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Peterson, C. Scharber, A. Thuesen, and K. Baskin, “A rapid response to COVID-19: one district’s pivot from technology integration to distance learning,” Information and Learning Science, vol. 121, no. 5–6, pp. 451–459, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Smith and A. Boscak, “A virtual emergency: learning lessons from remote medical student education during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Emergency Radiology, vol. 28, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Gyimah, “Assessing technological innovation on education in the world of coronavirus (COVID-19),” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. J. Ockey, “An overview of COVID-19’s impact on English language university admissions and placement tests,” Language Assessment Quarterly, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1–5, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Wong and Y. Zhang, “COVID-19 pivot: a reflection on assessments,” Accounting Research Journal, vol. 34, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2022 Prodhan Mahbub Ibna Seraj et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

3361

Downloads

1497

Citations