On 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared the existence of a coronavirus pandemic. All over the world, face-to-face classes were suspended, and social isolation was applied with the aim of slowing down the advance of the pandemic. More than 90% of students around the world saw their schools closed.
The creation of an educational system online (e-learning), implies much more than separating students and teachers from their physical learning space. In a very general way, in addition to the physical distance between those involved in the training process, e-learning implies a pedagogical redesign of a course and the preparation of social and cognitive interaction systems online.
With this study, we intend to analyse the perception of teachers in the implementation of emergency remote teaching, in the context of a Portuguese HEI.
Therefore, this paper aims to know the teachers’ perception of remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic; to know the e-learning tools used during the pandemic COVID-19; to identify the satisfaction regarding e-learning tools used during the COVID-19 pandemic; to know distance assessment strategies used during the pandemic COVID-19; and to distinguish teacher profiles according to the overall evaluation of the lessons in remote learning and the evaluation of the assessment process in remote learning.
1.1. Teaching in the Outbreak of an Emergency Remote Environment
Over the years, researchers in distance learning instructional design, and education technology carefully struggled to define terms such as online learning, distance learning, blended learning, and hybrid learning [
2], and to build and test technology-based educational models. Suddenly, the COVID-19 threat abruptly transformed higher education and the role instructors were used to performing. Pressed by the need to suspend the traditional face-to-face delivery mode, most teachers worldwide moved their classes online in order to address the severe global public health crisis [
3,
4].
In this way, the utopian desire of extending the people-centric classroom experience in space and time has finally come true [
5], forcing teachers to embrace remote digital strategies and tools. The change was disruptive in a deep sense. Because it succeeded a catastrophic event, there was no logic or natural evolution. Ali [
3] believes that the coronavirus has revealed emerging vulnerabilities in education systems around the world and that it is now clear that instructors need to adapt themselves to flexible education systems.
In fact, moving instruction online was a very quick, non-voluntary, and overwhelming process, as stated by Hodges et al. [
1]. Given these dimensions, the authors proposed to coin this move “Emergency Remote Teaching” (ERT), a distance and online instruction designed and delivered in pressing circumstances.
Before the pandemic context, online education and collaborative work had already been regarded as a valuable means to exchange ideas and mental frameworks and to develop a shared understanding of topics by involving participants in working together [
6]. However, with the lockdown, there was ambiguity and disagreement about the workload of teachers and students and about what to teach and what strategies to select. Instructors were engaged in adopting different sorts of strategies to improve students’ emotional and cognitive involvement. They were also forced to deal with formal and informal virtual settings that started to occur simultaneously.
The concept of instructional strategies (also named teaching strategies) is complex and, to a certain extent, fuzzy. It can relate to interventions guided by top-down, centralized control used by instructional designers, teachers, and trainers to plan lessons or blocks of instruction. It can, on the other hand, be grounded in and driven by epistemological orientations and theoretical foundations that are primarily constructivist and connectivist in nature [
4].
For several decades, the design of instructional strategies was linear and micro levelled, regarding the importance given to analysing particular learning outcomes, aligning them with suggested instructional strategies, and then delivering instruction in straightforward ways to elicit desired responses [
7]. However, the coronavirus created an unprecedented opportunity for instructors to carry out different sorts of experiments, as for the first-time, entire student bodies have been compelled to take all of their classes online.
During 2020 and 2021, a great deal of individual and institutional studies have been published [
4]. Most of them recognize that the primary objective in these circumstances was not to recreate a robust educational ecosystem but rather to provide temporary access to instruction and instructional support systems [
1]. This way, the available technology, the class size, and the lack of time to plan and design a consistent model constrained the strategies the instructor could use to facilitate delivery.
Bannan et al. [
7], claim that “we need to modernize our conceptualization of ‘instructional strategies,’ and expand these principles to support a more open, flexible, and personalized learning ecosystem”. In fact, the role of the instructor became multidimensional due to the context, and naturally expanded its scope to encompass other roles as facilitator, adviser, and mentor, among other dimensions.
According to Slusky [
8], the sudden move from face-to-face (or brick-and-mortar approaches) to remote instruction brought other sudden transitions. Innovative pedagogical strategies have certainly been put forward. An extensive range of pedagogical concerns emerged during this disruptive period that were not that central in the pre-pandemic period. For instance, the importance of voice and pitch management, the encouragement of the practice of remote feedback, the transformation of a large-class lecture course to smaller modules, the recording of lectures, as well as other strategies for student engagement in conferencing and synchronous planning, started playing a central role.
The quick and non-voluntary experiment in emergency remote teaching we went through alerted instructors to the ways in which online redesign requires additional time and resources to provide meaningful learning experiences and to create distinctive learning environments with the help of digital technologies.
For most instructors, the first challenge was to recreate the face-to-face experience [
4,
9]. Worldwide, most universities speedily adopted mediated communication modes (synchronous or asynchronous): Google Classroom, Microsoft Teams, Cisco, Webex, Zoom, and Moodle, among other tools.
Around the world, the 2020 Spring semester was a testing ground for the adaptability and flexibility of higher education in their day-to-day online teaching and learning communication. Despite different teaching styles and course formats, one of the tools that has become crucial was video conferencing. During the lockdown, videoconference tools (VCT) were embraced by teachers as a temporary solution to an urgent problem. As stated by Peters [
10], most universities were unprepared in terms of online delivery modes, so an expedient default was the replacement of face-to-face lecturing with the use of the Zoom. Despite several other available technologies, Zoom managed to hold 36% of the market share [
11], making it the most used platform for video conferencing.
Before the pandemic context, VCT was regarded as a way to expand learning opportunities, as they assist online learning and teaching through supporting, watching, and interacting both in a formal and informal way. In fact, the increasing availability of video conferencing tools enables multisensory experiences and offers valuable opportunities for complex multimodal and multiliteracies expression. As stated by Thorne and May [
12] “multimodality is an omnipresent feature of much communicative activity in online environments”. It implies a semiotic complexity that can include written and spoken language, image, gesture, and haptics, among others.
According to Burnett [
13], digital modes of communication have much to offer to pedagogy. They call for new discourse skills to overcome the lack of embodiment. Regarding the role of the teacher as a communicator, speaking directly to a camera, knowing that there are multiple viewers, having attentiveness and empathy to listen to our interlocutors with rare care and focus is also vital. Digital communication also creates pedagogical scenarios that are open and dialogical. Nevertheless, the author also states that, in terms of a more classic conception of teaching, status, self-perception, control, and authority can all be at risk.
During the pandemic, the use of digital tools related to communication technologies was in many instances involuntary.
Ali [
3] states that meta-synthesis of relevant literature reveals that in recent years, there has been an increasing interest in the development and use of multimedia-enhanced content through the use of ICT to enhance the quality of teaching and learning. However, the point was that the transition to online teaching, under the circumstances, ideally required digital-savvy teachers and quick online adaptability. Yeigh et al. [
14] state that creativity is needed to capitalize on affordances of technology, and also that time is required to learn how to integrate these tools into existing educational practices. In our opinion, regarding the current and future instructional scenarios, instructors need time to fully understand and manage multimodal communication tools.
Unlike video conferencing tools, learning management systems (LMS) have been central in higher education for more than two decades [
15]. They can be defined as web-based platforms for administration, documentation, tracking, reporting, and delivering courses or training programmes. Furthermore, the underlying assumption of these platforms is to provide a constructivist theory-based instruction, focusing on flexibility and learner autonomy.
Before the pandemic crisis, for most teachers, LMS were clearly regarded as a catalyst for a paradigm shift from traditional educational environments to online educational environments. Implementing and using LMS was also part of strategic plans in several faculties and departments, to promote changes induced by digital technologies and to improve and integrate the hybrid and web-enhanced teaching and learning environments. Furthermore, according to Dobre [
16], it was also fully recognized by instructors and scholars that LMS facilitate interaction and support higher-order learning, such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and collaboration.
However, in most cases, instructors tended to use LMS in a narrow fashion, as a repository, i.e., as an organizational infrastructure for learning materials relevant to a given course, making materials easily accessible, copied, and downloaded, primarily serving the purpose of supporting face-to-face teaching. LMS are indeed a powerful medium for enabling personal asynchronous learning, not only used to provide content to the students but also to incorporate alternatives to encourage their autonomous learning. According to Dias [
17], expediency and flexibility are the two most valuable features.
Several years ago, Norberg et al. [
18] had already stated that students’ asynchronous work can be supported much more effectively with learning management systems, by using a wide range of resources, such as assignments, drop boxes, forums, and other tools.
During the remote emergency context, instructional design and organization played a very important role and teachers were forced to become designers and tutors overnight, hence, LMS became the core of the teaching and learning process [
19]. LMS were a vital structure for ensuring educational sustainability, allowing teachers to track, report, and respond to learners’ needs. They also became a primary organizing construct for education in an emergency technology-supported environment and not a mere supplemental resource for asynchronous activities.
As pointed out by Ali [
3], overall, technology has become a powerful force in transforming the educational landscape. However, preparing to move education outside of traditional physical classrooms in response to COVID-19 instructors required a great deal of thought, coordination, and careful decision-making [
3].
In terms of pedagogical implications, one can expect that the post COVID-19 period will place greater emphasis on virtual learning and the role of the teacher and learners will significantly change. In this fashion, LMS allow different forms of teaching, by interconnecting, accelerating, condensing, monitoring, and supporting—with many possible combinations of instructional strategies encompassing substitution and integration.
Therefore, we can notice that somehow all the institutions and teachers implemented strategies and adopted technologies to react to the lockdown imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, we cannot find any study about teachers’ perception concerning the implementation of those strategies and technologies, and the learning process in all that period. This perception can be crucial to understanding what can possibly change in the post COVID-19 era and what could be an effective transformation in the learning and teaching processes.
1.2. Teaching and Assessment Methodologies in Situations of Crisis
In the context of remote teaching and learning, the pedagogical methodologies to be applied constituted a dimension on which many doubts were raised. The range of teaching methodologies available to the teacher is vast, from more traditional methodologies to more innovative and active methodologies. These methodologies can include a variety of teaching strategies ranging from exposition, interrogation, and action, such as problem-based learning, problem-solving, project-based learning, peer-reviewed learning, design thinking, case study, flipped classroom, among others. Gómez-Pablos et al. [
20] shows that the use of active methodologies with digital technologies improves the digital skills of teachers defined in the European framework for the digital competence of educators.
Digital competence has gained a strong prominence in the educational context. There is a growing interest in knowing the state of the digital competences of university teachers, that is, the set of knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary for a teacher to make effective use of technologies [
20].
Another factor related to emergency teaching and learning, which worried teachers and students during the time of the pandemic, is related to the distance assessment processes.
Assessment in the context of higher education is a complex issue that has always concerned teachers, students, managers of HEIs, and other players in educational processes. Assessment influences the way students organize their study and develop their skills [
21], and even the way students understand the processes involved in acquiring their learning [
22].
Often, the assessment process is seen solely as a way of measuring whether or not students have achieved the objectives of a given course.
In the context of higher education, the most implemented assessment instrument is the traditional written exam, wrapped in a classification and a hierarchy system. Usually, these written exams take place at a pre-defined time and focus on the results achieved during the training process, that is, they focus essentially on the product with a target on individual learning [
10]. The existing literature essentially describes two distinct assessment methods: the traditional method and alternative methods that essentially differ in their focus on teacher-centred practices and student-centred practices [
21]. Teacher-centred assessment practices circumscribe the focus on teacher assessment of the learning product. Student-centred assessment methods describe the focus on students’ self-assessment of the learning process itself. These methods allow the development of technical and transversal skills such as the ability to solve problems and the involvement of students in the process itself. Usually, these methods involve more global learning activities that are developed over the duration of the course, individually and in groups, focusing on both the product and the process, encouraging each student’s autonomy and responsibility [
14]. These methods can also cover practical laboratory work, projects, and reflections [
23]. The Bologna Process itself stimulated reflection on assessment and the need to implement more challenging, interactive, and creative tools and learning opportunities [
24,
25].
Thus, there are more and more advocates of an assessment that does not consider only one or more moments of assessment but includes reflection on the processes of acquiring knowledge and competencies, in a perspective of continuous and holistic learning (e.g., [
23,
25,
26]). McDowell [
27] emphasizes the instrumental characteristic of assessment as a form of learning and adds the responsibility of the students themselves in this process, understanding the assessment as an integral part of learning [
25].
In this context of continuous assessment throughout training, teachers also need to play a role, essentially as a facilitator of a collaborative teaching and learning process, through projects and the collective production of knowledge. Flores and Veiga Simão [
24] refer to the importance of making the learning process more creative, looking for innovative ways to structure teaching and assessment [
21].
There is also the importance of rethinking HEIs as a space for thinking, and for cognitive and social interaction capable of generating knowledge [
28].
According to Means et al. [
29], the assessment of learning in the context of online education is not done by the simple application of a learning measurement instrument and consequent release of a grade in the system. This process, which is of concern to all those involved in the training processes, today more than ever, requires the need to reflect on the assessment, essentially as a process and not as a product. Thus, the complexity of the process requires a great concern about the method of planning and execution, considering different criteria and modalities, including new times and individual and social spaces, in order to expand the potential to measure the acquisition of knowledge and skills in a reliable manner.
The active methodologies based on a critical process, self-assessment, network learning, problem-based and project-based, among others, are considered essential in these environments. As an example, it is possible to assess the degree and type of participation in a forum or digital portfolio, always offering constructive personalized feedback from the active teacher and learning mediator. Some of the individual oral exams may be implemented via videoconference, for example for the demonstration of knowledge, understanding, practical skills, and argumentation.
In an emergency teaching and learning context, all these considerations were of particular concern. There were many operational difficulties reported by teachers during the online assessment process. One of the major concerns is regarding the guarantee of students’ identity as well as the demonstration of some practical skills. In response, new software has popped up on the market that intends to address these concerns, namely online supervision systems (for instance, Proctortrack) which bring together advanced features such as [
8] real-time supervision of students during an exam through artificial intelligence, implementing continuous and peripheral scans of hardware to detect virtual machines and other restricted devices, disabling keys and applications that cannot be used during the online exam, facial recognition, and detection of attempts to receive outside help or to use unauthorized sources (devices, course materials), ways to mark attempts of searching the web for answers, the possibility of intervention by the watchman, blocking the browser, multi-factor biometric authentication, facial scan, etc.
In fact, online supervision still offers many challenges. Unlike an in-classroom exam, online monitoring requires students to have access to adequate technological infrastructure. Without that, the surveillance program will not function accurately. Naturally, this creates a separation between students who have and those who do not have the necessary technological infrastructure. There are also concerns about video recording processes, such as how it will be used and by whom.
It is unlikely that these problems will vanish in a short amount of time, which means that online supervision can only be offered as one more solution alongside other options. As advocated by Hussein et al. [
30], this type of assessment should not be promoted as the only solution, and it should be adopted and used carefully and selectively in contexts and situations in which it is the best solution. According to the FCCN (Scientific Computing Unit of the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology), currently, there are still no remote assessment systems, proctoring systems, data protection and identity assurance that are sufficiently tested, that serve the current purposes of Portuguese HEI and that guarantee compliance and consent by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
In this context, it is urgent to deepen the research and development in this area, which, according to Arnò et al. [
31] represents a crucial challenge to improve the quality of the current automated supervisory systems.
On the other hand, some studies have shown that the absence of stability of the teachers and their age seem to be factors related to the introduction of innovative practices in the teaching process [
32], whereas HEI with a stable number of teachers and older and senior teachers seem to introduce more innovative methods in their practices.
Moreover, it is also necessary to understand the level of satisfaction of teachers with the assessment methods they adopt during the pandemic period, knowing that in most cases they use the least worst assessment strategy, but without being satisfied with it.