Submitted Successfully!
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Ver. Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1 -- 1599 2022-11-14 09:23:49 |
2 update references and layout Meta information modification 1599 2022-11-15 02:54:25 | |
3 v2 -48 word(s) 1551 2022-12-02 12:28:50 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?


Are you sure to Delete?
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Ober, J.;  Kochmańska, A. Remote Learning in Higher Education. Encyclopedia. Available online: (accessed on 01 December 2023).
Ober J,  Kochmańska A. Remote Learning in Higher Education. Encyclopedia. Available at: Accessed December 01, 2023.
Ober, Józef, Anna Kochmańska. "Remote Learning in Higher Education" Encyclopedia, (accessed December 01, 2023).
Ober, J., & Kochmańska, A.(2022, November 14). Remote Learning in Higher Education. In Encyclopedia.
Ober, Józef and Anna Kochmańska. "Remote Learning in Higher Education." Encyclopedia. Web. 14 November, 2022.
Remote Learning in Higher Education

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought about a sudden transformation at universities. The previous mode of teaching has been replaced by remote education, the effectiveness of which depends, among other things, on the technological infrastructure of universities and the digital competence of lecturers and students. The study identified four dimensions (social-emotional, developmental, time-financial and negative attitude) in which students' evaluations vary. The social-emotional size of remote learning is more important for students who study remotely in a blended mode (compared to uniform). The developmental dimension is essential for students who participate in remote learning activities for longer during the day. In addition, a more extended period of remote learning promotes the greater importance of the time-financial dimension when evaluating remote knowledge. 

remote learning quality of education higher education

1. Introduction

Education has changed significantly since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 [1], bearing in mind the fact that educational institutions around the world were closed for months [2]. During the pandemic, teachers changed their pedagogical practices and also developed new teaching sequences [3]. COVID-19 caused a massive transformation in many aspects of the educational landscape [4]. Within days, there was a shift from traditional teaching to online schooling [5] due to the danger of the virus being transmitted at a very rapid pace.
Universities had no choice but to develop an agile learning mechanism to connect different geographic locations, courses, and time zones [6]. Online learning thus became an indispensable element for sustaining higher education institutions [7]. It has begun to play a major role in supporting the educational process [8]. It is also worth noting that the transition from traditional “face-to-face” training to remote learning was a completely new experience for both students and teachers, to which both sides had to adapt [9]. Although many students were familiar with the Internet resources that complemented the knowledge acquired through traditional means, they did not expect a complete and rapid change in the mode of education [10]. The new form also posed a huge challenge for teachers, as they had to develop their digital skills in accordance with universal trends and their field of knowledge [11]. As a result, this led to high levels of stress in them [12]. Thus, in order to mitigate it and prepare teachers for teaching in the online environment, professional development strategies were designed, developed, and implemented [13].
In addition, many universities were not adequately equipped with the technical or organizational infrastructure to implement such a rapid and radical change [14]. However, the situation has improved significantly over time, thanks to the use of diverse information and communication technologies. Recently, these technologies have become increasingly sophisticated, especially in the new reality brought by COVID-19 [15].
In pedagogical terms, information and communication technologies (ICTs) are defined, on the one hand, as a set of technologies that contain, store, and disseminate information [16][17] (for example, e-books, videos or databases) and, on the other hand, as technologies that are designed for short-term communication (for example, social networks and smartphones) [18].
Online platforms such as Zoom, Microsoft Teams, Google Classroom, virtual learning environments, social media, and diverse group forums, among others are used for remote learning. They are also tested to overcome the limitations of virtual education. Lecturers must work together at the institutional level to improve them [19].
There are diverse definitions of remote education. It is an alternative to desktop learning, where teaching and learning takes place through platforms, using the Internet and computers or smartphones [20]. It can also be described as a powerful platform, in a new form for both students and researchers, thanks to the availability of advanced technological tools [21]. Thus, it can be stated that remote learning uses tools that provide more innovative and flexible learning experiences [22], with a greater focus on the recipient [23].
Remote delivery of information affects many areas of learning, so its effectiveness will affect the level of knowledge in ecology, environmental protection (shaping pro-environmental attitudes of its recipients) and health, among others [24]. It is also worth mentioning that such education contributes to economic growth, sustainable development, or gender equality [25].
Although remote education has been studied extensively over the past two decades, the detailed opinions of students on such activities during the COVID-19 pandemic seem very relevant due to their impact on the education system [26]. Nowadays, many universities have recognized the importance of e-learning as a core component of their teaching system. Accordingly, further research is being conducted to understand in more detail its advantages, disadvantages, and challenges in this type of educational institution [27]. The uniqueness of the present research approach lies in the identification of the dimensions (socio-emotional, developmental, time and financial, and negative attitudes) of students’ evaluation of remote learning in higher education.

2. Remote Learning in Higher Education

In recent years, higher education institutions around the world have been experiencing rapid changes due to technological advances and social e-trends toward digitization [6]. Before the outbreak of the pandemic, universities in various countries represented varying levels when it came to the adoption of e-learning [28], even though remote learning is not an innovative educational approach. It has been integrated into higher education for many years [29]. The first educational programs based on correspondence and distance learning were initiated in the mid-19th century by the University of London. In 1873, the first official correspondence education program, known as the Society to Encourage Home Studies, was established in Boston, Massachusetts [30]. The year 1998 ushered in the growth of online programs, presented then by New York University. It is also worth mentioning here the University of Phoenix (known for conducting courses over the Internet), which began using online technology with CompuServe (an online service provider) in 1989, followed by the World Wide Web information system in 1991 [31].
As mentioned earlier, the pandemic reality forced universities to undertake efforts to make remote learning run smoothly, preventing obstacles from arising. Acting under exceptional circumstances, they have created virtual courses, using both synchronous and asynchronous forms depending on their content [32]. Although remote learning differs from traditional teaching [33], among other things, in terms of interactivity (whose deficit is caused by the absence of such important factors as social presence, social interaction and student satisfaction), it provides the opportunity for more people to continue learning [34]. What’s more, such a teaching model also shows outstanding commercial advantages [35].
Following on from earlier considerations, remote learning uses a wide range of tools that are tailored to the needs of both lecturers and learners. Moreover, many of them are free or licensed by the university [36]. These can include technology platforms [37] and applications that allow the users to create, edit, and share media files easily and quickly, without the need for storage on their device [38]. It is worth highlighting here interactive platforms such as Zoom, Skype, Google Meet or Microsoft Teams [39]. These are also referred to as video conferencing systems [40][41]. Their unquestionable advantage, in addition to the possibility of synchronous teaching, is the easy method for using them, which makes it possible to share differentiated teaching materials during the class, significantly enhancing the teaching process. In addition, numerous features allow, among other things, the creation of virtual classrooms where students can communicate with each other and perform varied tasks. They also participate in discussions monitored by the teacher [42].
WebVR technology has become an alternative to video conferencing platforms. It has made significant contribution to teaching and learning processes and provided new opportunities for interaction and collaboration through its tools. It is worth noting that it has been positively received by both listeners and lecturers [43].
One of the most valued aspects of remote education, is its flexibility in terms of time, which allows students to interact more with both lecturers and peers [11]. Asynchronous learning activities, where students learn at different times [44], on the other hand, allow for the ability to adjust the pace of learning to suit their needs. In addition, in virtual classrooms, students can access online resources and discuss with lecturers or group members anywhere [45]. Remote learning also contributes to students’ self-learning, self-education, and technological knowledge [46], increases the speed of knowledge acquisition and also develops the ability to learn and process information independently [47] through continuous learning of information and communication tools [48], and the development of digital competencies [49]. A significant advantage of remote education is also the saving of time and expenses [50] (related, among other things, to the cost of commuting) as well as the possibility of combining work with study.
In addition to the significant advantages of remote education outlined above, it also has drawbacks that affect its negative evaluation by participants in the classes. One of them is the fear of change that comes with learning new technologies. Interestingly, it can also occur in people who use computers [51]. In the group in question, it is also important to point out technical problems [52] that prevent active participation in activities. As a result of a significant reduction in social interaction [53], students may have a sense of isolation, which is further influenced by a change in the typical classroom environment [54]. Deprivation of contact with peers thus results in a loss of social ties.
Unfortunately, it also happens that many lecturers are insufficiently prepared to teach remotely [55] which affects the lack of adequate lecturer-student interaction [56]. Indeed, the behavior of teachers is an important factor that affects student engagement or lack thereof [57]. Attention should also be paid to the deterioration of students’ mental and physical health, symptoms of which include exhaustion and impaired concentration [58]. In addition, the pandemic reality promotes Internet addiction [59].


  1. Hesen, R.; Wals, A.E.; Tauritz, R.L. Creating a sense of community and space for subjectification in an online course on sustainability education during times of physical distancing. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2022, 23, 85–104.
  2. Odeh, A.; Keshta, I. Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on education: Moving towards e-learning paradigm. Int. J. Evaluation Res. Educ. 2022, 11, 588–595.
  3. Aidoo, B.; Macdonald, M.A.; Vesterinen, V.-M.; Pétursdóttir, S.; Gísladóttir, B. Transforming Teaching with ICT Using the Flipped Classroom Approach: Dealing with COVID-19 Pandemic. Educ. Sci. 2022, 12, 421.
  4. Sakti, A.M.T.; Ajis, S.Z.M.; Azlan, A.A.; Kim, H.J.; Wong, E.; Mohamad, E. Impact of COVID-19 on School Populations and Associated Factors: A Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Heal. 2022, 19, 4024.
  5. Sousa, M.J.; Marôco, A.L.; Gonçalves, S.P.; Machado, A.D.B. Digital Learning Is an Educational Format towards Sustainable Education. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1140.
  6. Hashim, M.A.M.; Tlemsani, I.; Matthews, R. Higher education strategy in digital transformation. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2021, 27, 3171–3195.
  7. Julián, B.F.; Denia, A.P.; Yáñez, J.M.F. A Methodological and Evaluation Proposal for Teaching Information Systems in COVID-19 Pandemic. J. High. Educ. Theory Pr. 2021, 21, 61–70.
  8. Stevanović, A.; Božić, R.; Radović, S. Higher education students’ experiences and opinion about distance learning during the Covid-19 pandemic. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 2021, 37, 1682–1693.
  9. Pokhrel, S.; Chhetri, R. A Literature Review on Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Teaching and Learning. High. Educ. Futur. 2021, 8, 133–141.
  10. Slykerman, R.F.; Li, E.; A Mitchell, E. Students’ Experience of Online University Education During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Relationships to Psychological Health. Stud. Success 2022, 13, 32–40.
  11. Mushtaha, E.; Abu Dabous, S.; Alsyouf, I.; Ahmed, A.; Abdraboh, N.R. The challenges and opportunities of online learning and teaching at engineering and theoretical colleges during the pandemic. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2022, 13, 101770.
  12. Wieland, N.; Kollias, L. Online Learning Before, During and After COVID-19: Observations Over 20 Years. Int. J. Adv. Corp. Learn. (iJAC) 2020, 13, 84–92.
  13. Singh, B.; Zamaletdinov, R.; Kaur, B.; Singh, J. Virtual Professional Learning for School Teachers to Support Them in Online Environment. Front. Educ. 2022, 7.
  14. Delcker, J.; Ifenthaler, D. Teachers’ perspective on school development at German vocational schools during the Covid-19 pandemic. Technol. Pedagog. Educ. 2020, 30, 125–139.
  15. Vitvitskaya, O.; Suyo-Vega, J.A.; Meneses-La-Riva, M.E.; Fernández-Bedoya, V.H. Behaviours and Characteristics of Digital Natives Throughout the Teaching-Learning Process: A Systematic Review of Scientific Literature from 2016 to 2021. Acad. J. Interdiscip. Stud. 2022, 11, 38.
  16. Brodny, J.; Tutak, M. Digitalization of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises and Economic Growth: Evidence for the EU-27 Countries. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022, 8, 67.
  17. Kuzior, A.; Postrzednik-Lotko, K.A.; Postrzednik, S. Limiting of Carbon Dioxide Emissions through Rational Management of Pro-Ecological Activities in the Context of CSR Assumptions. Energies 2022, 15, 1825.
  18. Valverde-Berrocoso, J.; Acevedo-Borrega, J.; Cerezo-Pizarro, M. Educational Technology and Student Performance: A Systematic Review. Front. Educ. 2022, 7, 405.
  19. Godber, K.A.; Atkins, D.R. COVID-19 Impacts on Teaching and Learning: A Collaborative Autoethnography by Two Higher Education Lecturers. Front. Educ. 2021, 6, 647524.
  20. Segbenya, M.; Bervell, B.; Minadzi, V.M.; Somuah, B.A. Modelling the perspectives of distance education students towards online learning during COVID-19 pandemic. Smart Learn. Environ. 2022, 9, 13.
  21. Bilal; Hysa, E.; Akbar, A.; Yasmin, F.; Rahman, A.U.; Li, S. Virtual Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Bibliometric Review and Future Research Agenda. Risk Manag. Heal. Policy 2022, 15, 1353–1368.
  22. Marszałek-Kotzur, I. Cognitive Technologies—Are We in Danger of Humanizing Machines and Dehumanizing Humans? Manag. Syst. Prod. Eng. 2022, 30, 269–275.
  23. Singh, V.; Thurman, A. How Many Ways Can We Define Online Learning? A Systematic Literature Review of Definitions of Online Learning (1988-2018). Am. J. Distance Educ. 2019, 33, 289–306.
  24. Wolniak, R.; Jonek-Kowalska, I. The Creative Services Sector in Polish Cities. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022, 8, 17.
  25. dos Santos, V.M.; Cernev, A.K.; Saraiva, G.M.M.; Bida, A.G. Faculty experience and digital platforms in education. Rev. Gestão 2022. ahead-of-print.
  26. Assi, E.; Rashtchi, M. Virtual classes during COVID-19 pandemic: Focus on university students’ affection, perceptions, and problems in the light of resiliency and self-image. Asian-Pacific J. Second Foreign Lang. Educ. 2022, 7, 17.
  27. Maatuk, A.M.; Elberkawi, E.K.; Aljawarneh, S.; Rashaideh, H.; Alharbi, H. The COVID-19 pandemic and E-learning: Challenges and opportunities from the perspective of students and instructors. J. Comput. High. Educ. 2021, 34, 21–38.
  28. Bawa’Aneh, M.S. Distance Learning During COVID-19 Pandemic in UAE Public Schools: Student Satisfaction, Attitudes and Challenges. Contemp. Educ. Technol. 2021, 13, ep304.
  29. Tsang, J.T.Y.; So, M.K.P.; Chong, A.C.Y.; Lam, B.S.Y.; Chu, A.M.Y. Higher Education during the Pandemic: The Predictive Factors of Learning Effectiveness in COVID-19 Online Learning. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 446.
  30. Paul, J.; Jefferson, F. A Comparative Analysis of Student Performance in an Online vs. Face-to-Face Environmental Science Course From 2009 to 2016. Front. Comput. Sci. 2019, 1.
  31. Palvia, S.; Aeron, P.; Gupta, P.; Mahapatra, D.; Parida, R.; Rosner, R.; Sindhi, S. Online Education: Worldwide Status, Challenges, Trends, and Implications. J. Glob. Inf. Technol. Manag. 2018, 21, 233–241.
  32. Amon, B.T. E-Studio: The use of information and communication technologies in the development of drawing competences in different educational environments. Cogent Educ. 2021, 9, 2007578.
  33. Almossa, S.Y. University students’ perspectives toward learning and assessment during COVID-19. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2021, 26, 7163–7181.
  34. Bali, S.; Liu, M.C. Students’ perceptions toward online learning and face-to-face learning courses. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2018, 1108, 012094.
  35. Deng, Q. A Research on Online Education Behavior and Strategy in University. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 1692.
  36. Svatos, J.; Holub, J.; Fischer, J.; Sobotka, J. Online teaching of practical classes under the Covid-19 restrictions. Meas. Sens. 2022, 22, 100378.
  37. Chadda, I.; Kaur, H. COVID pandemic and virtual classes: A study of students from Punjab. Asian Assoc. Open Univ. J. 2021, 16, 193–210.
  38. Perdomo, B.; Castillo, M.D.C.L.; Mas, O. Teaching creative careers in the pandemic. Learn. Teach. 2022, 15, 53–80.
  39. Demir, A.; Maroof, L.; Khan, N.U.S.; Ali, B.J. The role of E-service quality in shaping online meeting platforms: A case study from higher education sector. J. Appl. Res. High. Educ. 2020, 13, 1436–1463.
  40. Chessa, M.; Solari, F. The sense of being there during online classes: Analysis of usability and presence in web-conferencing systems and virtual reality social platforms. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2021, 40, 1237–1249.
  41. Chakraborty, P.; Mittal, P.; Gupta, M.S.; Yadav, S.; Arora, A. Opinion of students on online education during the COVID -19 pandemic. Hum. Behav. Emerg. Technol. 2020, 3, 357–365.
  42. Ibrahim, Y.; Hidayat-Ur-Rehman, I. COVID-19 crisis and the continuous use of virtual classes. Int. J. Adv. Appl. Sci. 2021, 8, 117–129.
  43. Estrada, F.J.R.; Ruiz-Ramírez, J.A.; George-Reyes, C.E.; Glasserman-Morales, L.D. Evaluation of a Virtual Campus Adapted to Web-Based Virtual Reality Spaces: Assessments of Teachers and Students. Front. Educ. 2022, 7.
  44. Faulconer, E.K.; Griffith, J.; Wood, B.; Acharyya, S.; Roberts, D. A Comparison of Online, Video Synchronous, and Traditional Learning Modes for an Introductory Undergraduate Physics Course. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2018, 27, 404–411.
  45. Zhang, X.; de Pablos, P.O.; Xu, Q. Culture effects on the knowledge sharing in multi-national virtual classes: A mixed method. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 31, 491–498.
  46. Yan, E.M.Y. Embracing Digital Teaching and Learning: Innovation Upon COVID-19 in Higher Education. In COVID-19 Pandemic, Crisis Responses and the Changing World; Zhao, S.X., Wong, J.H., Lowe, C., Monaco, E., Corbett, J., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2021; pp. 299–327.
  47. Sadeghi, M. A Shift from Classroom to Distance Learning: Advantages and Limitations. Int. J. Res. Engl. Educ. 2019, 4, 80–88.
  48. Dastjerdi, N.B. Analyzing the Opportunities and Challenges to use of Information and Communication Technology Tools in Teaching-learning Process. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 2016, 9, 1–8.
  49. Kuzior, A.; Kettler, K.; Rąb, Ł. Digitalization of Work and Human Resources Processes as a Way to Create a Sustainable and Ethical Organization. Energies 2021, 15, 172.
  50. Al-Ansi, A.M.; Garad, A.; Al-Ansi, A. ICT-Based Learning During Covid-19 Outbreak: Advantages, Opportunities and Challenges. Gagasan Pendidik. Indones. 2021, 2, 10–26.
  51. Oluwalola, F.K. Effect of Emotion on Distance e-Learning—The Fear of Technology. Int. J. Soc. Sci. Humanit. 2015, 5, 966–970.
  52. Ahshan, R. A Framework of Implementing Strategies for Active Student Engagement in Remote/Online Teaching and Learning during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Educ. Sci. 2021, 11, 483.
  53. Hopp, M.D.S.; Händel, M.; Bedenlier, S.; Glaeser-Zikuda, M.; Kammerl, R.; Kopp, B.; Ziegler, A. The Structure of Social Networks and Its Link to Higher Education Students’ Socio-Emotional Loneliness During COVID-19. Front. Psychol. 2022, 12, 6330.
  54. Maini, R.; Sehgal, S.; Agrawal, G. Todays’ digital natives: An exploratory study on students’ engagement and satisfaction towards virtual classes amid COVID-19 pandemic. Int. J. Inf. Learn. Technol. 2021, 38, 454–472.
  55. Yuniastari, R.; Da Silva, A.M. The Advantages and Disadvantages of Offline and Emergency Remote Online General English Classes. Lang. Circle: J. Lang. Lit. 2022, 16, 394–412.
  56. Mutalib, A.A.A.; Akim, A.M.; Jaafar, M.H. A systematic review of health sciences students’ online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. BMC Med Educ. 2022, 22, 1–34.
  57. Bergdahl, N.; Bond, M. Negotiating (dis-)engagement in K-12 blended learning. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2021, 27, 2635–2660.
  58. Lamanauskas, V.; Makarskaitė-Petkevičienė, R. Distance Lectures in University Studies: Advantages, Disadvantages, Improvement. Contemp. Educ. Technol. 2021, 13, ep309.
  59. Karakose, T.; Ozdemir, T.Y.; Papadakis, S.; Yirci, R.; Ozkayran, S.E.; Polat, H. Investigating the Relationships between COVID-19 Quality of Life, Loneliness, Happiness, and Internet Addiction among K-12 Teachers and School Administrators—A Structural Equation Modeling Approach. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Heal. 2022, 19, 1052.
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to : ,
View Times: 413
Revisions: 3 times (View History)
Update Date: 02 Dec 2022