The Impact of COVID-19 on E-Learning: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Contributor:
Mirjana Pejić Bach
,
Božidar Jaković
,
Ivan Jajić
,
Maja Meško

Due to its severity, the outbreak of COVID-19 led to unprecedented levels of social isolation that affected educational institutions, among others. Digital technologies such as cloud computing and video broadcasting helped the adoption of e-learning during the crisis.

  • e-learning
  • COVID-19
  • digital technologies

1. Introduction

In the past, the adoption of new technologies at the national level was mainly driven by economic development. Digitization has boomed in recent decades but not for everyone at the same time, indicating a digital divide [1][2], which refers to the gap between different demographic groups and countries/regions based on their access to modern information and communication technologies [3].
Countries that had insufficient funds for the early development of novel infrastructure such as broadband fell behind. European countries were no exception. The harsh difference between the more developed and the less-developed member countries of the European Union (EU) was evident in the first decade of the 21st century [4]. To overcome this gap, the European Commission introduced several initiatives. It started to measure digital and social development using different indicators under the umbrella term, the DESI index (The Digital Economy and Society Index), but this did not provide the planned outcome of the equal digital development of EU countries [5].
When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, isolation occurred at an invisible level, leading to massive closures of businesses, schools, universities, and public transportation. E-learning, e-commerce, e-business, and e-government became the primary online venues for conducting activities that previously required a physical presence. Based on previous findings, wealthier countries adopted new technologies faster and it was assumed that the same phenomenon would occur with the adoption of e-learning during the pandemic [6]. Therefore, the question arose as to whether this was also the case in European countries.

2. The Notion of E-Learning

Digital technologies, such as cloud computing, augmented reality, artificial intelligence, and video broadcasting, have transformed teaching from a traditional approach into a more contemporary and modernized approach [7][8]. E-learning falls under the broader concept of technology-based learning, which is based on innovations in digital transformation [9].
E-learning, the platform for delivering educational content and facilitating learning through technology, has recently gained popularity due to its convenience and adaptability. In contrast, traditional classrooms still use “chalk and lecture” and conventional face-to-face teaching methods in which a teacher writes on a blackboard and speaks to a group of students. Both approaches have advantages and disadvantages and the decision about which one to use depends on variables such as the subject matter, learning objectives, and available resources [10][11]. The “chalk and talk” method is preferable for subjects that focus on practical applications and are more difficult to teach using e-learning methods via an online platform [12]. The combination of both methods seems to be a reasonable option for most subjects in many cases [13].

3. E-Learning during the COVID-19 Era

National boundaries did not constrain the COVID-19 pandemic; therefore, it affected people of all nationalities, education and income levels, and genders. COVID-19 resulted in nationwide school closures in most countries, most of which lasted at least 10 weeks [14]. Children and students had to rely more on their resources to continue learning remotely via the Internet and other media, despite concerted efforts by the education community to ensure continuity of learning during this time [15]. Teachers also had to adapt to new pedagogical approaches and teaching methods for which they had not been adequately prepared [16][17].
During the COVID-19 pandemic, e-learning supported the abilities of students, academic staff, and professionals to develop professionally and personally [18][19][20]. Most higher education institutions offered online courses to students both on and off campus during the pandemic, and some have continued this practice [21][22]. Government spending on “education” as a percentage of GDP at the EU level has fluctuated between 4.7% and 5.1% between 1995 and 2021. In 1995, it was 4.9% of GDP, stagnated over the next decade, and declined to 4.7% in 2007. During the COVID-19 pandemic, government spending on education as a percentage of GDP at the EU level increased to 5.0% by 2020 [23].
However, the adoption of e-learning in response to the isolation caused by COVID-19 was not universally positive. During the pandemic, students with sufficient resources who were motivated and able to learn found alternative learning options, even when their schools or universities were not open [24]. Those from resource-poor backgrounds were often excluded when their schools or universities were closed [25][26]. Therefore, this crisis exposed the many deficiencies and inequities in education systems worldwide, from the lack of broadband access to the availability of portable devices [27][28]. Nevertheless, various strategies to bridge the digital divide in e-learning were implemented during the pandemic [29].
During the pandemic, several advantages and disadvantages of e-learning became apparent. Among the positive aspects, virtual classrooms allowed instructors to communicate effortlessly with students about their assignments and homework [30][31][32]. The negative aspects included that students could passively attend and leave lectures whenever they wanted and they were provided with little or no feedback from the instructor [30][31]. In addition, isolation during the pandemic contributed to psychological problems such as lower concentration, loneliness, and sleep problems. For this reason, during and after the pandemic, higher education institutions shifted their focus from a purely virtual to a hybrid approach by combining e-learning and a “talk and talk” approach [33][34].
Future educational programs must address the sense of community that was missing during the pandemic as it was dominated by online learning [35][36]. For this reason, many universities in the post-pandemic period are embracing hybrid degree programs, which offer a better solution, to ensure that students gain hands-on experience and have face-to-face contact so that they can stay motivated and take advantage of on-campus facilities and support while enjoying the flexibility of distance learning.
Although the COVID-19 pandemic has almost disappeared from European countries due to vaccinations, its effects have exposed the vulnerability of countries in their ability to adapt to crises. Moreover, new pandemics are likely to increase due to increased traffic and populations [37]. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to study the variations among countries in e-learning adoption during the most recent pandemic, along with the impact of economic development and the severity of the pandemic response on the use of e-learning.

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/math11061520

References

  1. Bach, M.P.; Zoroja, J.; Vukšić, V.B. Review of corporate digital divide research: A decadal analysis (2003–2012). Int. J. Inf. Syst. Proj. Manag. 2022, 1, 41–55.
  2. Bach, M.P.; Zoroja, J.; Vukšić, V.B. Determinants of Firms’ Digital Divide: A Review of Recent Research. Procedia Technol. 2013, 9, 120–128.
  3. Cullen, R. Addressing the digital divide. Online Inf. Rev. 2001, 25, 311–320.
  4. Cruz-Jesus, F.; Oliveira, T.; Bacao, F. Digital divide across the European Union. Inf. Manag. 2021, 49, 278–291.
  5. Kovács, T.Z.; Bittner, B.; Huzsvai, L.; Nábrádi, A. Convergence and the Matthew Effect in the European Union Based on the DESI Index. Mathematics 2022, 10, 613.
  6. 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. 2022, 34, 21–38.
  7. Šumak, B.; Heričko, M.; Pušnik, M. A meta-analysis of e-learning technology acceptance: The role of user types and e-learning technology types. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2011, 27, 2067–2077.
  8. Liu, S.H.; Liao, H.L.; Pratt, J.A. Impact of media richness and flow on e-learning technology acceptance. Comput. Educ. 2009, 52, 599–607.
  9. Hunady, J.; Pisár, P.; Vugec, D.S.; Bach, M.P. Digital Transformation in European Union: North is leading, and South is lagging behind. Int. J. Inf. Syst. Proj. Manag. 2022, 10, 58–81.
  10. Siriopoulos, C.; Pomonis, G.A. Alternatives to “Chalk and Talk”: Active Vs. Passive Learning—A Literature Review of the Debate. SSRN Electron. J. 2006.
  11. Malin, M. Enhancing lecture presentation through tablet technology. Account. Res. J. 2014, 27, 212–225.
  12. Głodowska, A.; Wach, K.; Knežević, B. Pros and Cons of e-Learning in Economics and Business in Central and Eastern Europe: Cross-country Empirical Investigation. Bus. Syst. Res. Int. J. Soc. Adv. Innov. Res. Econ. 2022, 13, 28–44.
  13. Shallcross, D.E.; Harrison, T.G. Lectures: Electronic presentations versus chalk and talk—A chemist’s view. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2007, 8, 73–79.
  14. Engzell, P.; Frey, A.; Verhagen, M.D. Learning loss due to school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2021, 118, e2022376118.
  15. Brozović, M.; Ercegović, M.; Meeh-Bunse, G. e-Learning in Higher Institutions and Secondary Schools during COVID-19: Crisis Solving and Future Perspectives. Bus. Syst. Res. Int. J. Soc. Adv. Innov. Res. Econ. 2022, 13, 45–71.
  16. Kern, E.; Wehmeyer, E. The Palgrave Handbook of Positive Education; Springer Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021.
  17. Grah, B.; Penger, S. COVID-19 and the Challenges of Transition to Online Learning. ENTRENOVA-ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion 2021, 7, 134–148.
  18. Coman, C.; Țîru, L.G.; Meseșan-Schmitz, L.; Stanciu, C.; Bularca, M.C. Online Teaching and Learning in Higher Education during the Coronavirus Pandemic: Students’ Perspective. Sustainability 2020, 12, 10367.
  19. Favale, T.; Soro, F.; Trevisan, M.; Drago, I.; Mellia, M. Campus traffic and e-Learning during COVID-19 pandemic. Comput. Netw. 2020, 176, 107290.
  20. Dečman, N.; Rep, A. Digitalization in Teaching Economic Disciplines: Past, Current and Future Perspectives. Bus. Syst. Res. Int. J. Soc. Adv. Innov. Res. Econ. 2022, 13, 1–7.
  21. Vaneva, M.; Bojadjiev, M.I. Doing Business in the ‘New Normal’: COVID-19 School Leaders’ Language Manners. ENTRENOVA-ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion 2021, 7, 401–409.
  22. Leem, B.H. An effect of value co-creation on student benefits in COVID-19 pandemic. Int. J. Eng. Bus. Manag. 2021, 13, 18479790211058320.
  23. Eurostat Statistics Explained. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Government_expenditure_on_education (accessed on 20 January 2023).
  24. Tadesse, S.; Muluye, W. The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on education system in developing countries: A review. Open J. Soc. Sci. 2020, 8, 159–170.
  25. Darling-Hammond, L.; Flook, L.; Cook-Harvey, C.; Barron, B.; Osher, D. Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Appl. Dev. Sci. 2019, 24, 97–140.
  26. UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning. Embracing a Culture of Lifelong Learning: Contribution to the Futures of Education Initiative: Report: A Transdisciplinary Expert Consultation; UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning: Hamburg, Germany, 2020; Available online: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000374112 (accessed on 8 January 2023).
  27. Barrot, J.S.; Llenares, I.I.; del Rosario, L.S. Students’ online learning challenges during the pandemic and how they cope with them: The case of the Philippines. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2021, 26, 7321–7338.
  28. Zakota, Z. Analysing Web 2.0 Usage of High School Students in the Partium Region before the COVID-19 Pandemic. ENTRENOVA-ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion 2020, 6, 258–264.
  29. Singh, S.; Singh, U.S.; Nermend, M. Decision analysis of e-learning in bridging digital divide for education dissemination. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2022, 207, 1970–1980.
  30. Pikoos, T.; Buzwell, S.; Sharp, G.; Rossell, S. The ‘Zoom Effect’: Exploring the Impact of Video-Calling on Appearance Dissatisfaction and Interest in Cosmetic Treatment during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Aesthet. Surg. J. 2021, 41, 2066–2075.
  31. Shin, M.; Hickey, K. Needs a Little TLC: Examining College Students’ Emergency Remote Teaching and Learning Experiences during COVID-19. J. Furth. High. Educ. 2020, 45, 973–986.
  32. Watermeyer, R.; Crick, T.; Knight, C.; Goodall, J. COVID-19 and Digital Disruption in UK Universities: Afflictions and Affordances of Emergency Online Migration. High. Educ. 2020, 81, 623–641.
  33. Bashir, A.; Bashir, S.; Rana, K.; Lambert, P.; Vernallis, A. COVID-19 Adaptations; the Shifts Towards Online Learning, Hybrid Course Delivery and the Implications for Biosciences Courses in the Higher Education Setting. Front. Educ. 2021, 6, 711619.
  34. Cunha, M.N.; Chuchu, T.; Maziriri, E. Threats, Challenges, and Opportunities for Open Universities and Massive Online Open Courses in the Digital Revolution. Int. J. Emerg. Tech. Learn 2020, 15, 191–204.
  35. Chatterjee, R.; Correia, A.P. Online Students’ Attitudes Toward Collaborative Learning and Sense of Community. Am. J. Distance Educ. 2019, 34, 53–68.
  36. Czerniewicz, L.; Trotter, H.; Haupt, G. Online teaching in response to student protests and campus shutdowns: Academics’ perspectives. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 2019, 16, 43.
  37. Zhang, W.F.; Stephen, P.; Theriault, J.F.; Wang, R.; Lin, S.X. Novel coronavirus polymerase and nucleotidyl-transferase structures: Potential to target new outbreaks. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2020, 11, 4430–4435.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
Video Production Service
Feedback