The pandemic 2020 drew a “waterline” between two concepts — “Emergency Remote Teaching” (ERT) and “High-Quality (Effective) Online Learning” (Hodges et al., 2020). ERT is considered to be “the temporary transition of learning to an alternative mode of content delivery due to crisis circumstances”. In 2021 Melissa Bond, Svenja Bedenlier et al. captured significant attention worldwide in the review that collected and synthesised the findings of 282 primary empirical studies conducted by 1019 authors from 73 countries during the initial 10 months of the pandemic. The compelling results of their research highlighted crucial insights that resonated across the globe.

One of the negative consequences of ERT was the problem of psychological distress. Therefore, the Yandex conducted a large-scale all-Russian study in 2020, specifically examining the emotional burnout experienced by school teachers. The findings revealed that 75% of participants displayed evident symptoms of burnout, with 38% of teachers being in the acute phase.

The “Hybrid” training format has also made its adjustments to the problem and has become widespread along with such training formats as “Face-to-Face” and “Remote/Virtual” but more than 90% of teachers recognise a digital disadvantage associated with the “Hybrid” format that makes a teaching-learning process more time-consuming.  On the other hand, several studies indicate a shift away from the traditional classroom format in the educational process. This trend signifies a decline in the dominant position that the classroom format has held for centuries. In 2022, A.A. Margolis et al. showed that among the students of the Moscow State University of Psyсhology and Education (N = 761), only 10.8% of them preferred the full-time (classroom) study format. The distance learning format ranked first, with 49.5% of participants selecting it, while the mixed format claimed the second position with a preference of 39.7%. The research project led by E.I. Kazakova and I.E. Kondrakova involved students from 30 Russian universities (N = 4558) representing 23 regions of Russia revealed that students perceive distance learning as a means to fulfill their need for personal subjectivity and to take the initiative in educational activities.

Meanwhile, a study conducted by A.V. Filkina et al. on Russian universities students (N = 25400 students, 2021) using the “Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8)” method revealed blended learning is linked to a higher likelihood of experiencing signs of psychological distress among students.

According to the researchers, the analysis of the relationship between the learning format and the occurrence of psychological distress symptoms shows ambiguous results that students who exclusively study in a distance-learning format present the lowest levels of psychological distress. Full-time education slightly increases the likelihood of experiencing distress symptoms. At the same time, most often signs of psychological distress are observed in students studying in a mixed format, when some classes are held full-time, some remotely.

However, the experiences gained during the pandemic and post-pandemic periods indicate that the alternative to ERT in the form of High-Quality Online Learning has the potential to yield excellent educational outcomes and is linked to psychological well-being. An experiment conducted on younger schoolchildren demonstrated that remote synchronous classes aimed at fostering creativity are equally effective, if not superior, to traditional classroom sessions, debunking existing social stereotypes. The experimental group exhibited slightly higher creativity scores compared to the control groups (L.E. Jalalova, R.V. Komarov). Similar positive educational outcomes have been achieved across various levels of education, including distance Master's degree programmes, advanced training courses, and professional retraining programmes. Therefore, the question of utmost importance in the post-pandemic period is what conditions guarantee the success of remote teaching (including digital formats) and promote the students digital well-being.

Building upon the systemic methodology, we identify three approaches to remote teaching: projective (substitutional), combinatorial (compilative), ecosystem. The projective approach entails a classroom methods direct transfer, techniques, models into the digital space, as the “transfer method” by Gonzalez-Urquijo et al. (2021). The combinatorial approach entails the simultaneous use of various digital tools, with the selection of tool combinations for educational tasks determined by both the nature of the tasks and the teacher's familiarity with the diverse array of digital tools available on the EdTech services market. The ecosystem approach highlights the importance of teachers and educational institutions adopting a unified and well-organised IT solution. It maintains a balance in the “open-closed” parameter, includes essential functionality for the educational process right from the start, catering to various tasks of different levels of difficulty, and offers a single entry point, allowing users to access all tools with just one account. Additionally, it ensures seamless integration of ecosystem tools with each other, while also providing the option for independent use or integration with third-party tools. It prioritises security, confidentiality, and data protection in interactions and operations and enables long-term, strategically planned collaboration with the team, rather than focusing solely on short-term outcomes. The third aspect involves a distinct differentiation between the concepts of “effectiveness” (“What have you achieved?”) and “efficiency” (“At what cost?”). The efficiency coefficient (E) can be calculated by the formula: E = R / C. “R” is a result (such as the number of tasks checked by the teacher), and “C” is the cost, which represents the amount of operations carried out to achieve the result. According to the research calculations, the effectiveness of the ecosystem approach in remote work is shown to be 3 to 30 times higher compared to the combinatorial approach. The magnitude of this increase depends on factors such as the subject content and complexity of educational tasks. Therefore, implementing the ecosystem approach has a direct impact on students' psychological well-being and influences hygienic, aesthetic, and other factors that contribute to their overall condition (due to reducing overload and tasks, as well as allowing more freedom for meaningful activities).

The digital well-being of both students and teachers is a system-forming function of the teachers’ success in a distant educational process. As the authors have consistently demonstrated, effectiveness rarely guarantee effectiveness in practice. The differentiation between effectiveness and efficiency compels us to approach success in terms of the methodological principle of determinism, which states that external causes manifest through internal conditions (S.L. Rubinstein). These internal conditions encompass various factors, such as referring to an appropriate IT solution (the use of MS Teams or Google Classroom) within an ecosystem approach, choosing the way of remote working (combinatorial or ecosystem), and the level of digital competency. The motivation for successful distance learning has been formulated by C. Hodges et al. (2020). They define “High-quality (Effective) Online Learning” as an approach that aims to cultivate an educational community and offer students support not only in their academic pursuits but also through collaborative educational activities and various forms of social support. The creation of a learning community is a crucial semantic factor in ensuring the success of remote work. When aiming to foster the digital well-being of students, teachers face the responsible task of not only enhancing their digital competencies but also carefully selecting an approach that aligns with the teaching objectives of the system.

Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The Difference Between Emergency Remote Teaching and Online Learning. EDUCAUSE Review, 27. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning Bond, M., Bedenlier, S., Marín, V.I. et al. Emergency remote teaching in higher education: mapping the first global online semester. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 18, 50 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00282-x Komarov, R. V. Effectiveness vs efficiency: forks of success in remote work / R. V. Komarov // Methodical online games to help a teacher: author's developments of undergraduates of the programme "Personal potential development: personalisation and digitalization of education" : An educational and methodological guide / Under the general editorship of R.V. Komarova, O.M. Zvereva, N.D. Vyun. – Moscow : Pero Publishing House, 2023. – pp. 9-34. – EDN ZWLFVD. Komarov, R. V. The work of a teacher at a distance: approaches to the use of digital tools / R. V. Komarov // Bulletin of the Moscow State Pedagogical University. Series: Pedagogy and Psychology. – 2021. – № 3(57). – Pp. 56-78. – DOI 10.25688/2076-9121.2021.57.3.03. – EDN ROAILO. Falloon, G. From digital literacy to digital competence: the teacher digital competency (TDC) framework. Education Tech Research Dev 68, 2449–2472 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09767-4 Gonzalez-Urquijo, M., Gonzalez-Hinojosa, D. E., Rojas-Mendez, J. et al. Transferring face-to-face sessions to virtual sessions in surgical education: a survey-based assessment of a single academic general surgery programme. Eur Surg 53, 55–59 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10353-021-00691-2 Butrime E. (2021) Virtual Learning Environments and Learning Change in Modern Higher Education During the Covid-19 Coronavirus Pandemic: Attitudes of University Teachers. In: Rocha Á., Adeli H., Dzemyda G., Moreira F., Ramalho Correia A.M. (eds) Trends and Applications in Information Systems and Technologies. WorldCIST 2021. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 1367. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-72660-7_22 Learning and Collaboration Technologies (2020). Human and Technology Ecosystems. 7th International Conference, LCT 2020, Held as Part of the 22nd HCI International Conference, HCII 2020, Copenhagen, Denmark, July 19–24, 2020, Proceedings, Part II. Editors: Panayiotis Zaphiris, Andri Ioannou. Springer, Cham. Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50506-6