Session Information
11 ONLINE 51 A, Quality of higher education: Students' perception
Paper Session
MeetingID: 924 2827 8203 Code: 5sZdVt
Contribution
Ensuring the quality of higher education is at the top of the agenda in the global context for achieving sustainable development goals, in the Bologna Process, but the crucial element is quality assurance in terms of the internal quality assurance of each university (United Nations, 2015; Cirlan & Loukkola, 2021). With the onset of the epidemiological constraints of the pandemic, one of the key issues that have emerged and are still being addressed is how remote learning would affect the quality of higher education. Experts of the International Association of Universities (IAU) point out that the impact of emergency digitalization of higher education on the quality of teaching and learning cannot yet be assessed decently, especially on a global scale. Although it is emphasized that remote learning cannot guarantee the same level of quality of education as full-time face-to-face learning, remote learning is still better than the cancellation of the teaching and learning process. Researchers elsewhere have explored issues related to student perception of the quality of the study process in higher education, as it can impact their learning, engagement, and overall satisfaction of the study process. Research reveals that the status of students for scholarship, extracurricular activities, parents’ education, age, previous result, and university they study in has a significant influence on perception about the quality of higher education (Akareem, & Hossain, 2016).
The student-centered higher education approach has become more popular last decades, students are paying their fees to undertake higher education, so students’ satisfaction become one of the indicators for the quality of higher education. Most commonly the quality of teaching staff (Dicker et al., 2017, Zineldin et al., 2011) and the organization of the educational process affect the way students perceive the quality of studies (Zineldin et al., 2011). However, there can be other factors that affect students’ perception of cumulative satisfaction, for example, cleanliness of classrooms, toilets, politeness of professors, the physical appearance of professors and assistants (Zineldin et al., 2011). By changing the teaching and learning mode to remote learning in higher education institutions the question of how students perceive the quality of the study process in higher education remains. What do we know from the study that students at most value teachers in the remote learning process, considering their teachers to be important in achieving the study (Dodo-Balu, 2021). As it was concluded by researchers, the quality of the remote study process is particularly influenced by the following factors: technical infrastructure and accessibility, remote learning competence and pedagogies, and the field of study (Marinoni, Land & Jensen, 2020).
The current study focuses on the student's perception of the quality of organization of the remote study process in Higher Education, by analyzing their experiences.
Therefore there are two main research questions:
- How do students assess the possibility of organizing the study process remotely in the future in epidemiologically safe conditions?
- What should be taken into account from student experience in remote studies?
Method
This qualitative study aimed to gain a deeper insight into the experience of higher education institution students during remote learning throughout the second outbreak of COVID-19 (Spring 2021). Surveys are one of the most popular methods for monitoring and evaluating the quality of studies in higher education institutions (Cirlan & Loukkola, 2021). Students were asked to fill in the 109-item questionnaire that was distributed to all University of Latvia students. A questionnaire was developed by the authors and approved by the UL Study Department to explore the impact of Covid-19. The questionnaire was developed based on a review of the literature and a follow-up study (Nimante, 2021). It consisted of three main question blocks: demographic questions, questions related to the organization of the study process in remote learning, and open-ended questions. In this particular paper, we are going to analyze students' responses to open-ended questions. 742 students from 13 faculties of the University of Latvia participated in the study. Student responses were analyzed using an inductive content analysis approach, and data were processed in the qualitative data analysis software program NviVo12. The aim of quantitative study and the usage of the qualitative content analysis approach was to enhance understanding of the survey data and to distill words into fewer content-related categories to attain a precise and broad description of the phenomenon - the experience of the students during remote learning throughout the second outbreak of COVID-19 (Spring 2021). The inductive coding process was represented as three main phases (Elo & Helvi Kyngas, 2008): 1. Preparation (units of analysis were selected and stored, and it was decided to use only latent content -sentences and words); 2. Organizing (become immersed with the data, analyzing unstructured data using QSR NVivo 12, a qualitative data analysis program (QDA) with open coding (notes and text written), developing coding sheets (headings), grouping them by higher-order, categorizing and making abstractions – formulating a general description of the research topic); 3. Reporting (analyzed process and results were reported by developing categories and sub-categories with higher education students’ recommendations based on their experience). To ensure the validity of the open coding of the study data, categories and subcategories were discussed among the researchers and how the data would be labeled and re-coded as needed.
Expected Outcomes
The data analysis will be completed by May 2022 and the authors aim to identify and outline how do students assess the possibility of organizing the study process remotely in the future in epidemiologically safe conditions, and what should be taken into account from past student experience in remote studies to assure the quality of study process in future. Nevertheless, the preliminary findings indicate that students emphasize that the remote learning format is prosperous. Still, the involvement and support of the lecturer in practical work and seminars are significant, so students would like the practical work to take place in person. Students also emphasize that learning problems are caused by insufficient technical support, uniform online tasks, lack of group work and communication with classmates, and other social conditions. Students' and lecturers' digital competence and communication in the digital environment and the skills to plan their time are influenced by the quality of studies. Due to the massive transformative impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the education system, remote learning experiences among higher education students remains relevant, which needs to be considered when planning successful lecturer-student collaboration in the future, rethinking distance learning as part of full-time study.
References
1.Akareem, H.S. & Hossain, S.S. (2016). Determinants of education quality: what makes students’ perception different? Open Review of Educational Research, 3(1), 52-67. Doi: 10.1080/23265507.2016.1155167 2.Andrea Dodo-Balu, A. (2021). Hidden in plain sight: contrasting management and student perceptions of the value of casual teachers in online higher education. Journal of Further and Higher Education. Doi: 10.1080/0309877X.2021.1900800 3.Brinson, J. (2015). Learning outcome achievement in non-traditional (virtual and remote) versus traditional (hands-on) laboratories: A review of the empirical research. Computers and Education, 87, 218-237. 4.Cirlan, E., & Loukkola, T. (2021). Internal quality assurance in times of Covid-19. Retrieved from European University Association (EUA) https://eua.eu/downloads/publications/internal%20qa.pdf 5.Dicker, R., Garcia, M., Kelly, A., Modabber, P., O’Farrell, A., Pond, A., Pond, N. & Mulrooney, H.M. (2017). Student perceptions of quality in higher education: effect of year of study, gender and ethnicity. New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, 12(1). https://eprints.kingston.ac.uk/id/eprint/42771/1/Kelly-A-42771-VoR.pdf 6.Heidari, E., Mehrvarz, M., Marzooghi, R., & Stoyanov, S. (2021). The role of digital informal learning in the relationship between students' digital competence and academic engagement during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(4), 1154-1166. 7.Ho, I., Cheong, K., & Weldon, A. (2021). Predicting student satisfaction of emergency remote learning in higher education during COVID-19 using machine learning techniques. PloS One, 16(4), E0249423. 8.Jung, J., & Shin, J. (2021). Assessment of university students on online remote learning during COVID-19 pandemic in Korea: An empirical study. Sustainability (Basel, Switzerland), 13(19), 10821. 9.Marinoni, G., Land, H. V. T., & Jensen, T. (2020). The impact of COVID-19 on higher education around the world. Retrieved from International Association of Universities (IAU) https://www.iau-aiu.net/IMG/pdf/iau_covid19_and_he_survey_report_final_may_2020.pdf 10.Nimante, D. (2021). COVID-19 Difficulties in the Remote Learning Process and Opportunities to Overcome Them: The Perspective of Future Teachers. In L. Daniela (ed.), Humans, technologies and quality of education, 2021 = Cilvēks, tehnoloģijas un izglītības kvalitāte (pp. 165–179). Latvijas Universitāte. 11.Sameerah, T. S. (2021). Higher Education and Quality Assurance in Egypt: Pre and Post COVID19. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 8(2), 96-107. 12.United Nations (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. A/res/70/1. https://sdgs.un.org/sites/default/files/publications/21252030%20agenda%20for%20sustainable%20development%20web.pdf 13.Zineldin, M., Akdag, H.C.& Vasicheva, V. (2011). Assessing quality in higher education: new criteria for evaluating students’ satisfaction. Quality in Higher Education. 17 (2), 231-243. Doi: 10.1080/13538322.2011.582796
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.