M.3 Teaching in a crisis? Guidance for digital education in Pandemic Times
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Lehren und Lernen 413
M.3 Teaching in a crisis? Guidance for digital education
in Pandemic Times
Mareike Pinnecke, Martin Weiß, Verena Backer, Wissam Tawileh
Technische Universität Dresden, Professur für Wirtschaftsinformatik,
insb. Informationsmanagement
1 Introduction
As the COVID-19 pandemic enforced governments around the world to suspend
social gatherings including on-site teaching at educational intuitions, universities
had to rely on digital technologies to compensate face-to-face activities and maintain
teaching and learning operations. This paper aims to explore problems and challenges
that faced lecturers during the rapid changeover to digital teaching in response
to the limitations caused by the crisis. The case study focuses on the Technische
Universität Dresden as an example for the transition to digital teaching in the context
of an unforeseen crisis. A set of practical recommendations to support academic
teaching staff in adopting effective digital teaching is developed based on needs and
requirements identified in the literature and extensive qualitative interviews with
experts in digital teaching and higher education fields.
2 Research Design
Figure 1: DOIT-Model (adapted by Horz & Schulze-Vorberg, 2017, p.7)
Gemeinschaften in Neuen Medien 2020 Dresden
414 Lehren und Lernen
The framework of this study is oriented on the DOIT-Model (Figure 1) imitated and
proposed by Horz and Schulze-Vorberg (2017) to illustrate the key components and
their interdependence to integrate digital teaching and learning in higher education.
The four components: Didactics, Organisation, Individual, and Technology are
utilised here as action fields to systematically investigate:
1. What challenges and problems face digital teaching in a crisis situation?
2. How can lecturers overcome these challenges and problems?
To answer these questions, a qualitative empirical approach was adopted to gain
an in-depth understanding of challenges and problems faced experienced academic
and administrative staff during the crisis using semi-structured interviews for data
collection and qualitative analysis for data analysis. The guidelines for the experts
interviews were developed based on the findings of two key studies on challenges and
difficulties facing digital learning in higher education (Behrens et al., 2017; Schmahl,
2008) and the coding guideline for data analysis was informed by two further
studies identifying barriers and factors influencing e-learning adoption in higher
education (Jokiaho et al., 2018; Meriem and Youssef, 2019). The acute problems
in the changeover to digital teaching arose in the current crisis were extended with
findings from three TU Dresden information sources: the official information websites
(Pressestelle der TU Dresden, 2020a), FAQs (Pressestelle der TU Dresden, 2020b),
and the communication portal “Matrix” (Matrix, 2020).
The authors conducted seven interviews with experts working in Dresden via video
conference in the period from April 14th, 2020 to April 30th, 2020. The interview
partners were selected to cover a variety of roles in order to capture as many different
points of view and perspectives as possible. The first six experts, who have a teaching
role at the university, highlighted didactical, organisational, individual, and technical
existing or potential problems and proposed recommendations to overcome these
problems. While the last expert is responsible for the central e-learning support at
a university institution and played a special role to validate results of the previous
interviews. The recorded interviews were transcribed following general rules by
Dresing and Pehl (2018) and the transcripts were coded using Mayring’s (2000)
Qualitative Content Analysis (QCA) method to: (1) deductively cluster the challenges
and problems aligned to the DOIT-Model components and (2) inductively systemise
the recommendations for action as mentioned by the experts. Anchor examples were
given to coding rules for transparent and consistent category formation and double
coding was used to avoid bias. At the end of the coding process, the analysis results
of all interviews were quantitatively evaluated and interpreted in the light of their
relevance.
Gemeinschaften in Neuen Medien 2020 Dresden
Lehren und Lernen 415
3 Results
From the analysis of the seven experts interviews, the answers to the research
questions on challenges and problems facing digital teaching in a crisis situation
and the recommendation proposed to overcome these problems are presented here.
Challenges and problems:
To quantify the results, the different factors were classified into “less relevant”,
“relevant” and “very relevant” based on the frequency each problem, or one of its
attributes, appears in the coded transcripts. Multiple mentions of the same attribute
of the same problem were only counted once to eliminate redundancy.
Figure 2 shows the frequency of each coding unit mentioned by each expert. Aspects
that were mentioned only once or by only one expert are classified as „less relevant“.
These aspects are: Insufficient Recognition of Work, Insufficient training in the area of
usage, Uncertainty regarding rights of use, and Lack of technical assistance. Coding
units that were mentioned by more than one expert, but by less than six were classified
as “relevant”. Relevant aspects include: Quality of teaching deteriorating, Insufficient
consultation, Insufficient communication, Insufficient support from the institution,
Uncertainty regarding data privacy protection, Time and effort increased, Resistance
to change, More demanding working conditions due to the crisis, and Confusing toolkit.
Aspects that were mentioned by all six experts were classified as “very relevant”. These
are: Uncertainty regarding examination modalities, Lack of media competence, Lack of
Infrastructure, and Lack of reliable tools.
Figure 2: Results of the deductive analysis of problem factors
Gemeinschaften in Neuen Medien 2020 Dresden416 Lehren und Lernen
Recommendations for action:
The seven experts were asked for their proposed recommendations for action to
support instructors in moving to digital teaching and these were clustered into the
four areas of didactic, organisational, individual, and technical recommendations for
action. The results of the inductive analysis are visualized in Figure 3.
The most important didactic recommendation which was mentioned three times by
two experts was for lecturers to consider using external sources. Expert D gave an
example of this, which implies that Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) should be
linked to support their own teaching as an additional source of information. A further
recommendation by two experts (D and F) was to increase asynchronous knowledge
transfer. The experts believe that the students should be given the opportunity to
acquire as much knowledge as possible on their own. The next recommendation that
could be derived from the interviews was didactic standardisation. The focus of this
idea was to create cross-university, nationwide standards and modules in order to
achieve more uniform teaching with less effort. The last didactic category with more
than two mentions, was that teachers should offer the widest possible range of digital
courses. The availability of teaching material is more important than perfect quality
which can be revised continuously.
Regarding the organisational recommendations for the implementation of digital
university teaching, the most frequent category was providing temporal support
for self-organisation. Important objectives of this area were to find a tool for self-
organisation of teaching, clear definitions of the time frame or to use the existing
timetable as orientation. Another elaborated category was the need to restructure
faculty guidelines. One way of doing this was to create extrinsic motivation on
the faculty side, for instance by creating incentives to increase the digitisation of
teaching. A similar solution was to set a fixed percentage of virtual teaching as a
guideline for lecturers to maintain digitized contents. The next category considered
was that teachers should devote sufficient time to organizing examinations. This says,
on one hand, that no rash decisions should be made on how to implement exams and,
on the other hand, that the option to postpone exams period should be considered.
The category Concepts for support options, raised in interviews D and E, can also
be helpful at the organisational level. One of the support possibilities mentioned is
to create mentoring concepts for students so that they can be actively supported and
have contact persons for questions.
On the level of individual recommendations for action, one particular category
emerged with four mentions by three different experts. These recommendations
could be summarized as to Provide clarity on the implementation and content of
Gemeinschaften in Neuen Medien 2020 DresdenLehren und Lernen 417
knowledge transfer. Part of this was, for example, to use only tools that teachers
are proficient in, formulate clear teaching goals, throw out superfluous material,
or to create further training formats such as mini-videos. Take mental insecurities
into account was another category, which was mentioned in Interviews D and E. In
general, the statement was that many actors, both students and lecturers, feel insecure
because of the changes and this must be taken seriously. In more detail, this also
means that there is the possibility of overburdening oneself in the home office by
excessive personal demands, whereby particular attention must be paid to mental
health. A further recommendation for action, which was expressed in Interview C,
was that flexibility of working hours should be guaranteed. For example, it should
also be possible to work from home at weekends in order to reduce the daily working
hours and workload on weekdays. A final aspect related to recommendations at
individual level was to establish the appreciation of work. Especially feedback on
the teaching content created was seen as very important, which can be combined with
the recognition for particularly good digital teaching offers and the acknowledgement
of teachers’ efforts to create, enhance, and share didactical content for digital learning.
Figure 3: Recommendations for action proposed more than once
For the fourth sub-area, technical recommendations for action, Development
of technical infrastructure was the most important measure recommended by
three different experts. One essential aspect is to provide more hardware to fill
infrastructure gaps, by setting up rental pools for technical equipment for instance.
Gemeinschaften in Neuen Medien 2020 Dresden418 Lehren und Lernen
It was also recommended to invest more in technology for recordings. Resources
that have been built up in this crisis should be retained for similar situations in the
future. Provide technical alternative solutions was the second category that was
mentioned four times by three experts. It is important that teachers have a tool for
digital teaching, but also have alternative tools at hand. It was also mentioned in
the interviews that students and teachers could use the network and rooms at vacant
hotels. A last important recommendation for action is to recognize the problems that
might arise on students’ side and to address them properly.
4 Discussion
This qualitative empirical study was conducted in an early stage of emergency mode
operations (started March, 21st) at the TU Dresden, where digital teaching was being
increased and extended gradually to compensate campus closure and physical absence
of students and teachers. The study results and findings, therefor, should be seen as
an instant active investigation of a rapid ongoing change in a very dynamic situation.
Although the identified challenges and the evolved recommendations are neither
complete nor exclusive, they present a systemised status que analysis with a snapshot
of practical problems and experts proposed solutions to help teachers, students, and
institutions beyond ad-hoc crisis response.
In general, the recommendations for action proposed by the experts were clustered
according to the DOIT-Model components and match the problems identified in the
deductive analysis of the experts interviews. The most relevant problems identified
were Uncertainty regarding examination modalities, for which the recommendation
was proposed to take sufficient time to organize the examination. For Lack of
media competence, it was recommended to create clarity about implementation and
content of knowledge transfer. For Lack of infrastructure, a general recommendation
was to develop the technical infrastructure, and for Lack of reliable tools, it was
recommended to provide alternative technical solutions.
The last interview was conducted with a revised interview guide that specifically
addressed interim results from the previous research process with the aim of
validating them with a focus on the “very relevant” aspects. Expert G could confirm
the aspect Uncertainty regarding examination modalities as a problem that also
exists at other universities beyond the TU Dresden. The aspects Lack of media
competence, Lack of Infrastructure, and Lack of reliable tools were also confirmed
by Expert G. However, it was also emphasized that infrastructure is a problem,
especially at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, and that a great progress
has already been made. Furthermore, the inductively categorised recommendations
for action were approved.
Gemeinschaften in Neuen Medien 2020 DresdenLehren und Lernen 419
The expert validated that on the didactic level it is very advantageous to use asynchronous
knowledge transfer and also not to have a 100% quality standard for the first concept of
a digital teaching offer. In organisational recommendations for action, the expert also
emphasized the importance of maintaining existing resources, for instance the timetable
for the organisation. And at individual level, Expert G also sees a need to make working
hours more flexible, for example work five hours a day and consider working on weekends.
Finally, at the level of technical recommendations for action, it was emphasized again
that it is imperative to offer alternative technical solutions, just as highlighted in the
other interviews. This validation of the problems and recommendations from an external
perspective should increase results’ validity.
Limitations and implications:
Multiple problems identified in this study align with challenges to digitalisation of
higher education known from previous research conducted before the COVID-19
crisis, which makes some findings seem expected and logical. While this confirms
the need to accelerate the development and adoption of digital learning strategies at
educational institutions (not only universities), the purpose and timing of this study
gave account to capturing experts thoughts and ideas under time and work pressure
during the pandemic crisis. It focused on prioritising pragmatic solutions for a current
situation rather than developing innovative approaches for strategic change, which
needs a wider range of in-depth analysis and research iterations.
The main limitation of this study is the small sample of interviews with seven experts
who are all in a close relation to the TU Dresden. Therefore, it is difficult to derive a
generally valid analysis which fits other institutions and universities. A comprehensive
research on the subject is needed to include different universities’ perspectives as well
as external, non-teaching experts and students.
It also can be noted in the results, that a given expert might have identified multiple
aspects of a particular problem while another expert highlighted a different
problem, which may have influenced the coding frequencies of particular aspects.
For example, Expert B addressed six different aspects of the problem of “More
demanding working conditions due to the crisis situation”, which can be related to
his Saxony-wide activities in media and education. Expert C, in contrast, mentioned
five different aspects of the problem “Lack of infrastructure”, which may be linked
to his computer science background and profession. Nevertheless, due to their
leading roles in e-learning and digitalisation, the interviewees showed a high
suitability to elaborate on the subject of this study. Since most of the experts are
lecturers themselves, they mostly provide a practitioner perspective on the problems
in digitalisation of higher education.
Gemeinschaften in Neuen Medien 2020 Dresden420 Lehren und Lernen
Thus, it can be assumed that they may identify fewer or different problems than
lecturers who are not familiar with the field of e-learning. A more heterogeneous
sample of interviewees from different backgrounds and roles would reduce this bias
in future similar studies.
Five of the seven experts expected that the crisis will lead to accelerated digitalisation
efforts in the future. Additionally, four of the seven experts stated that it should be
reflected which elements from digital teaching can and should be taken back into face-
to-face teaching. Two experts criticized the quality of the teaching materials created
during the crisis under pressure of time and noted that there must be a revision step
before further use of the material in the future. Lastly, three experts shared the view
that the current trend of intensified e-learning use should be maintained for example
by creating extrinsic motivators in the institutions. Since the majority of the experts
interviewed raised the need for systematic enquiry on how the step back to face-to-
face teaching can be taken effectively, a future research effort would be on which
digital elements need to be adopted and how a hybrid teaching can be implemented
in a post COVID-19 era.
Literature
BEHRENS J./ GOERTZ L./ RADOMSKI S./ SCHMID U./ THOM S. (2017),
Die Hochschule im digitalen Zeitalter, Monitor Digitale Bildung, No. 2,
Gütersloh, p. 25, https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/fileadmin/files/BSt/
Publikationen/GrauePublikationen/DigiMonitor_Hochschulen_final.pdf,
May 19th, 2020
DRESING T./ PEHL T.(2018), Praxisbuch Interview, Transkription und Analyse, 8.
Auflage, Marburg , p. 21–25, https://www.audiotranskription.de/download/
praxisbuch_transkription.pdf, May 19th, 2020
HEVNER A. R./ MARCH S. T./ PARK J./ RAMS. (2004), Design Science in
Information Systems Research, MIS Quarterly, Vol.28, No. 1, p. 82–86,
https://wise.vub.ac.be/sites/default/files/thesis_info/design_science.pdf,
May 19th, 2020
HORZ H./ SCHULZE-VORBERG L. (2017), Digitalisierung in der Hochschule,
Analysen und Argumente, Ausgabe 283, p. 7–8, https://www.kas.de/
documents/252038/253252/7_dokument_dok_pdf_50782_1.pdf/51d9958b-
ae68-e2f4-d98b-7508d9bf4123?version=1.0&t=1539648275004,
May 19th, 2020
JOKIAHO A./ MAY B./ SPECHT M./ STOYANOV S. (2018), Barriers to using
E-Learning in an Advanced Way, iJAC, Vo. 11, Issue 1, p.18–21
MATRIX (2020), Digitales Lernen und Lehren, https://matrix.tu-dresden.de/#/
room/#digitale-lehre:tu-dresden.de, May 27th, 2020
Gemeinschaften in Neuen Medien 2020 DresdenLehren und Lernen 421
MATRIX (2020), [SLK] Testumgebung, https://matrix.tu-dresden.de/#/room/#slk-
testumgebung:tu-dresden.de, May 27th, 2020
MAYRING P. (2000), Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse, Forum: Qualitative
Sozialforschung, Vo. 1, No. 2, Art. 20, p. 3–6, http://www.qualitative-
research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1089/2384, May 19th, 2020
MERIEM B./ YOUSSEF A. (2019), Exploratory of factors influencing e-learning
adoption by higher education teachers, Springer Verlag, p. 9–10
PRESSESTELLE DER TU DRESDEN (2020), FAQ, https://tu-dresden.de/
tu-dresden/gesundheitsmanagement/information-regarding-covid-19-
coronavirus-sars-cov-2/faq-gueltig-ab-4-mai-2020, May 27th, 2020
PRESSESTELLE DER TU DRESDEN (2020), Informationen zu COVID-19
(Coronavirus SARS-COV-2), https://tu-dresden.de/tu-dresden/
gesundheitsmanagement/information-regarding-covid-19-coronavirus-sars-
cov-2, May 27th, 2020
SCHMAHL J. (2008), E-Learning an Hochschulen – Kompetenzentwicklungs-
strategien für Hochschullehrende, Bochum, p.198–199
Gemeinschaften in Neuen Medien 2020 DresdenYou can also read
