Motivation, Stress and Impact of Online Teaching on Italian Teachers during COVID-19
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. The Study and Its Contexts
- (i)
- The online teaching–learning questionnaire measures the challenges faced in online teaching–learning, teacher-trainees’ proposals for effective online teaching–learning and students’ preferred way of conducting the course [22]. Background information provided by respondents measured variables including gender and the curriculum. The learning impact of online teaching and the challenges of online teaching–learning was measured through items that contained Likert scales of 1 = strongly agree (SA), 2 = agree (A), 3 = undecided (U), 4 = disagree (D), and 5 = strongly disagree (SD). The alpha values of 0.82 and 0.78 were found for the two constructs with Likert scales. There was internal consistency reliability test of items on the two constructs with the Likert scales using the Cronbach’s Alpha (α) reliability analysis measures. However, Ghazali [23] indicated that the alpha value of 0.60 is also considered acceptable. This study attained the alpha values of 0.82 and 0.78 on the two constructs with the Likert Scales.
- (ii)
- The Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) of Sheldon Cohen [24]. The scale consists of ten questions that are used to measure the perception of stress experienced by the participants over the past month. It includes a 5-point Likert scale that capture responses ranging from never to very often [25]. Total mean scores of 0–13 are considered to be low stress, 14–26 indicate moderate stress and 27–40 indicate high stress. The PSS is an easily and widely used tool with acceptable psychometric properties [26]. Across diverse conditions, researchers report relatively satisfactory reliability estimates for scores on the 14- and 10-item forms. For example, Roberti et al. [27] reported reliability estimates of 0.85 and 0.82 in a university sample for scores on the perceived helplessness and perceived self-efficacy scales, respectively.
- (iii)
- The teacher motivation scale section, career development, consists of twelve items scored on a five-point Likert scale (from 1 = not at all true of me to 5 = very true of me) [28]. Sample items are: “When reading for a course, I make up questions to help focus my reading”; “I try to change the way I study in order to fit the course requirements and the lecturer’s teaching style”. In the current study, the scales showed adequate levels of reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.66). From the Teacher Motivation Framework of Analysis described in Section 3, a 98-question questionnaire was created and sent to 19 SC COs. The19 SC COs were not selected randomly, but rather on the basis of the type of SC Basic Education programming they were involved in. The survey was opened 15 April and closed on 29 April. Cos were given the option of completing the survey online via SurveyMonkey or via Microsoft Word attachment. Of the 19 COs contacted, 16 responded: from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Haiti, Kyrgyzstan, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Nepal, Nicaragua, the Philippines, Tajikistan and Uganda.
3. The Triadic Model
3.1. Reliability Analysis of the Questionnaires
3.2. Correlation
4. Discussion and Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Keppens, K.; Consuegra, E.; De Maeyer, S.; Vanderlinde, R. Teacher beliefs, self-efficacy and professional vision: Disentangling their relationship in the context of inclusive teaching. J. Curric. Stud. 2021, 53, 314–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caena, F.; Redecker, C. Aligning teacher competence frameworks to 21st century challenges: The case for the European Digital Competence Framework for Educators (Digcompedu). Eur. J. Educ. 2019, 54, 356–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Boccioni, S.; Earp, J.; Panesi, S. DigCompEdu. Il quadro di Riferimento Europeo Sulle Competenze Digitali dei Docenti; Istituto per le Tecnologie Didattiche, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR), 2018. Available online: https://www.itd.cnr.it/doc/DigCompEduITA.pdf (accessed on 7 June 2021).
- Schmid, M.; Brianza, E.; Petko, D. Self-reported technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) of pre-service teachers in relation to digital technology use in lesson plans. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2021, 115, 106586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marek, M.W.; Chew, C.S.; Wu, W.C.V. Teacher experiences in converting classes to distance learning in the COVID-19 pandemic. Int. J. Distance Educ. Technol. 2021, 19, 40–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Limone, P. Towards a hybrid ecosystem of blended learning within university contexts. In CEUR Workshop; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2021; p. 2817. [Google Scholar]
- Tejasvee, S.; Gahlot, D.; Poonia, R.; Kuri, M. Digital Learning: A Proficient Digital Learning Technology Beyond to Classroom and Traditional Learning. In Advances in Information Communication Technology and Computing; Springer: Singapore, 2021; pp. 303–312. [Google Scholar]
- Bernard, R.M.; Borokhovski, E.; Schmid, R.F.; Tamim, R.M.; Abrami, P.C. A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in higher education: From the general to the applied. J. Comput. High. Educ. 2014, 26, 87–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vo, H.M.; Zhu, C.; Diep, N.A. The effect of blended learning on student performance at course-level in higher education: A meta-analysis. Stud. Educ. Eval. 2017, 53, 17–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Semenzato, A. Alma mater- how the great European universities are trying to deal with the consequences of the pandemic. In Linkiesta; Linkiesta.it S.r.l.: Milan, Italy, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Toto, G.A.; Limone, P. New Perspectives for Using the Model of the Use and Acceptance of Technology in Smart Teaching. In International Workshop on Higher Education Learning Methodologies and Technologies Online; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 115–125. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, H.; Hall, N.C.; Rahimi, S. Self-efficacy and causal attributions in teachers: Effects on burnout, job satisfaction, illness, and quitting intentions. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2015, 47, 120–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, M.-H.; Chen, H.-C.; Liu, K.-S. A Study of the Effects of Digital Learning on Learning Motivation and Learning Outcome. Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 2017, 13, 3553–3564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abou-Khalil, V.; Helou, S.; Khalifé, E.; Chen, M.A.; Majumdar, R.; Ogata, H. Emergency Online Learning in Low-Resource Settings: Effective Student Engagement Strategies. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernández-Batanero, J.M.; Román-Graván, P.; Reyes-Rebollo, M.M.; Montenegro-Rueda, M. Impact of Educational Technology on Teacher Stress and Anxiety: A Literature Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bandura, A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action; Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1986; pp. 23–28. [Google Scholar]
- Compeau, D.R.; Higgins, C.A. Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Q. 1995, 19, 189–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Venkatesh, V.; Bala, H. Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decis. Sci. 2008, 39, 273–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Compeau, D.; Higgins, C.A.; Huff, S. Social cognitive theory and individual reactions to computing technology: A longitudinal study. MIS Q. 1999, 23, 145–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barak, M. Science teacher education in the twenty-first century: A pedagogical framework for technology-integrated social constructivism. Res. Sci. Educ. 2017, 47, 283–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, J.Y.; Nian, M.W. The dynamics of an online learning community in a hybrid statistics classroom over time: Implications for the question-oriented problem-solving course design with the social network analysis approach. Comput. Educ. 2021, 166, 104120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsitsia, B.Y. Assessing Teacher-Trainees’ Perceptions Regarding the Online teaching-learning mode of the Agricultural Science Course. Int. J. Educ. Res. 2020, 8, 111–124. [Google Scholar]
- Ghazali, D. Kesahan dan Kebolehpercayaan Dalam Kajian Kuantitatif dan Kualitatif. J. Inst. Perguru. Islam 2008, 61–82. [Google Scholar]
- Cohen, S. Psychosocial vulnerabilities to upper respiratory infectious illness: Implications for susceptibility to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2021, 16, 161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Deemah, A.A.; Sumayah, A.; Dalal, A. Perceived stress among students in virtual classrooms during the COVID-19 outbreak in KSA. J. Taibah Univ. Med Sci. 2020, 15, 398–403. [Google Scholar]
- Taylor, J.M. Psychometric analysis of the ten-item perceived stress scale. Psychol. Assess 2015, 27, 90–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Roberti, J.W.; Harrington, L.N.; Storch, E.A. Further Psychometric Support for the 10-Item Version of the Perceived Stress Scale. J. Coll. Counseling 2006, 9, 135–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guajardo, J. Teacher Motivation: Theoretical Framework, Situation Analysis of Save the Children Country Offices, and Recommended Strategies; Save the Children: Fair-Field, CT, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Tan, P.J.B. Applying the UTAUT to understand factors affecting the use of English e-learning websites in Taiwan. Sage Open 2013, 3, 2158244013503837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Heilporn, G.; Lakhal, S.; Bélisle, M. An examination of teachers’ strategies to foster student engagement in blended learning in higher education. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 2021, 18, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Linn, M.; Eylon, B.; Kidron, A.; Gerard, L.; Toutkoushian, E.; Ryoo, K.; Bedell, K.D.; Swearingen, A.; Clark, D.; Virk, S.; et al. Knowledge Integration in the Digital Age: Trajectories, Opportunities and Future Directions. In Rethinking Learning in the Digital Age: Making the Learning Sciences Count, 13th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2018; International Society of the Learning Sciences: London, UK, 2018; Volume 2. [Google Scholar]
- Canlon, E.; Anastopoulou, S.; Conole, G.; Twiner, A. Interdisciplinary Working Methods: Reflections Based on Technology-Enhanced Learning (TEL). Front. Educ. 2019, 4, 134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hodges, C.; Moore, S.; Lockee, B.; Trust, T.; Bond, A. The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educ. Rev. 2020, 27, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Williamson, B.; Eynon, R.; Potter, J. Pandemic politics, pedagogies and practices: Digital technologies and distance education during the coronavirus emergency. Learn. Media Technol. 2020, 45, 107–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pérez-Paredes, P.; Guillamón, C.O.; Van de Vyver, J.; Meurice, A.; Jiménez, P.A.; Conole, G.; Hernández, P.S. Mobile data-driven language learning: Affordances and learners’ perception. System 2019, 84, 145–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Panisoara, I.O.; Lazar, I.; Panisoara, G.; Chirca, R.; Ursu, A.S. Motivation and Continuance Intention towards Online Instruction among Teachers during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Mediating Effect of Burnout and Technostress. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 8002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salikhova, N.R.; Lynch, M.F.; Salikhova, A.B. Psychological Aspects of Digital Learning: A Self-Determination Theory Perspective. Contemp. Educ. Technol. 2020, 12, ep280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Toto, G.; Limone, P. From Resistance to Digital Technologies in the Context of the Reaction to Distance Learning in the School Context during COVID-19. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Onyema, E.M.; Eucheria, N.C.; Obafemi, F.A.; Sen, S.; Atonye, F.G.; Sharma, A.; Alsayed, A.O. Impact of Coronavirus Pandemic on Education. J. Educ. Pract. 2020, 11, 108–121. [Google Scholar]
- Cucco, B.; Gavosto, A.; Romano, B. How to Fight Against Drop Out and Demotivation in Crisis Context: Some Insights and Examples from Italy. In Radical Solutions for Education in a Crisis Context; Springer: Singapore, 2021; pp. 23–36. [Google Scholar]
- Ardizzoni, S.; Bolognesi, I.; Salinaro, M.; Scarpini, M. Didattica a Distanza con le Famiglie: L’esperienza di Insegnanti e Genitori, in Italia e in Cina, Durante L’emergenza Sanitaria 2020. Uno Studio Preliminare. Infanzia, Famiglie, Servizi Educativi e Scolastici nel Covid-19; University of Bologna: Bologna, Italy, 2020; p. 71. (In Italian) [Google Scholar]
- Tan, P.J.B.; Hsu, M.H. Developing a system for English evaluation and teaching devices. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Applied System Innovation (ICASI), Sapporo, Japan, 13–17 May 2017; pp. 938–941. [Google Scholar]
- Sprenger, D.A.; Schwaninger, A. Technology acceptance of four digital learning technologies (classroom response system, classroom chat, e-lectures, and mobile virtual reality) after three months’ usage. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 2021, 18, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fan, R.-J.D.; Tan, P.J.B. Application of Information Technology in Preschool Aesthetic Teaching from the Perspective of Sustainable Management. Sustainbility 2019, 11, 2179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bolatov, A.K.; Seisembekov, T.Z.; Askarova, A.Z.; Baikanova, R.K.; Smailova, D.S.; Fabbro, E. Online-Learning due to COVID-19 Improved Mental Health Among Medical Students. Med Sci. Educ. 2021, 31, 183–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bao, W. COVID-19 and online teaching in higher education: A case study of Peking University. Hum. Behav. Emerg. Technol. 2020, 2, 113–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Liu, X.; Liu, J.; Zhong, X. Psychological State of College Students during COVID-19 Epidemic (3/10/2020). Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3552814 (accessed on 7 June 2021).
Descriptives | Statistic | Std. Error | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Impact on Online Teaching Total | Mean | 12.7674 | 0.15742 | |
95% Confidence Interval for Mean | Lower Bound | 12.4584 | ||
Upper Bound | 13.0765 | |||
5% Trimmed Mean | 12.6059 | |||
Median | 12.0000 | |||
Variance | 17.049 | |||
Std. Deviation | 4.12907 | |||
Minimum | 6.00 | |||
Maximum | 26.00 | |||
Range | 20.00 | |||
Interquartile Range | 5.00 | |||
Skewness | 0.555 | 0.093 | ||
Kurtosis | 0.027 | 0.186 | ||
Stress Total | Mean | 27.2049 | 0.30936 | |
95% Confidence Interval for Mean | Lower Bound | 26.5975 | ||
Upper Bound | 27.8124 | |||
5% Trimmed Mean | 27.0287 | |||
Median | 26.0000 | |||
Variance | 65.846 | |||
Std. Deviation | 8.11455 | |||
Minimum | 10.00 | |||
Maximum | 48.00 | |||
Range | 38.00 | |||
Interquartile Range | 12.00 | |||
Skewness | 0.323 | 0.093 | ||
Kurtosis | −0.652 | 0.186 | ||
Motivation Total | Mean | 28.9331 | 0.15983 | |
95% Confidence Interval for Mean | Lower Bound | 28.6193 | ||
Upper Bound | 29.2470 | |||
5% Trimmed Mean | 29.0061 | |||
Median | 29.0000 | |||
Variance | 17.576 | |||
Std. Deviation | 4.19241 | |||
Minimum | 17.00 | |||
Maximum | 39.00 | |||
Range | 22.00 | |||
Interquartile Range | 6.00 | |||
Skewness | −0.262 | 0.093 | ||
Kurtosis | −0.053 | 0.186 |
Correlations | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Motivation Total | Impact_on_Online_Teaching_Total | Stress Total | ||
Motivation Total | Pearson Correlation | 1 | −0.173 ** | −0.216 ** |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
N | 688 | 688 | 688 | |
Impact on Online Teaching Total | Pearson Correlation | −0.173 ** | 1 | 0.235 ** |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
N | 688 | 688 | 688 | |
Stress Total | Pearson Correlation | −0.216 ** | 0.235 ** | 1 |
Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
N | 688 | 688 | 688 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Toto, G.A.; Limone, P. Motivation, Stress and Impact of Online Teaching on Italian Teachers during COVID-19. Computers 2021, 10, 75. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers10060075
Toto GA, Limone P. Motivation, Stress and Impact of Online Teaching on Italian Teachers during COVID-19. Computers. 2021; 10(6):75. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers10060075
Chicago/Turabian StyleToto, Giusi Antonia, and Pierpaolo Limone. 2021. "Motivation, Stress and Impact of Online Teaching on Italian Teachers during COVID-19" Computers 10, no. 6: 75. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers10060075
APA StyleToto, G. A., & Limone, P. (2021). Motivation, Stress and Impact of Online Teaching on Italian Teachers during COVID-19. Computers, 10(6), 75. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers10060075