Ma'am Rea

Essays

Learners in Face-to-Face and in On-line Class

The Covid‐19 pandemic has been a wake‐up call to many countries regarding their capacity to cater for mass online education. This situation has been further complicated in developing countries, such as South Africa, who lack the digital infrastructure for the majority of the population. The extended lockdown in South Africa saw most of the universities with mainly in‐person teaching scrambling to source hardware (e.g. laptops, internet access), software (e.g. Microsoft packages, data analysis packages) and internet data for disadvantaged students in order for the semester to recommence. Not only has the pandemic revealed the already stark inequality within the tertiary student population, but it has also revealed that high internet data costs in Philippines may perpetuate this inequality, making online education relatively inaccessible for disadvantaged students.

The benefits of education on economic development are well established in the literature (Gyimah‐Brempong, 2011), ranging from health awareness (Glick et al., 2009), improved technological innovations, to increased capacity development and employment opportunities for the youth (Anyanwu, 2013; Emediegwu, 2021). One of the ways in which inequality is perpetuated in South Africa, and Africa as a whole, is through access to education (Anyanwu, 2016; Coetzee, 2014; Tchamyou et al., 2019); therefore, understanding the obstacles that students face in transitioning to online learning can be helpful in ensuring more equal access to education.

Using students' responses from survey questions and the difference in the average grades between pre‐lockdown and post‐lockdown, our findings indicate that students' performance in the online setting was positively associated with better internet access. Accessing assisted study material, such as narrated slides or recordings of the online lectures, also helped students. We also find lower academic performance for students who reported finding transitioning to online difficult and for those who expressed a preference for self‐study (i.e. reading through class slides and notes) over assisted study (i.e. joining live lectures or watching recorded lectures). The average grades between pre‐lockdown and post‐lockdown were about two points and three points lower for those who reported transitioning to online teaching difficult and for those who indicated a preference for self‐study, respectively. The findings suggest that improving the quality of internet infrastructure and providing assisted learning can be beneficial in reducing the adverse effects of the Covid‐19 pandemic on learning outcomes.

Several studies that have also compared the effectiveness of online learning and F2F classes encounter methodological weaknesses, such as small samples, not controlling for demographic characteristics, and substantial differences in course materials and assessments between online and F2F contexts. To address these shortcomings, our study is based on a relatively large sample of students and includes demographic characteristics such as age, gender and perceived family income classification. The lecturer and course materials also remained similar in the online and F2F contexts. A significant proportion of our students indicated that they never had online learning experience before. Less than 20% of the students in the sample had previous experience with online learning. This highlights the fact that online education is still relatively new to most students in our sample.

Online learning is a form of distance education which mainly involves internet‐based education where courses are offered synchronously (i.e. live sessions online) and/or asynchronously (i.e. students access course materials online in their own time, which is associated with the more traditional distance education). On the other hand, traditional F2F learning is real time or synchronous learning. In a physical classroom, instructors engage with the students in real time, while in the online format instructors can offer real time lectures through learning management systems (e.g. Blackboard Collaborate), or record the lectures for the students to watch later. Purely online courses are offered entirely over the internet, while blended learning combines traditional F2F classes with learning over the internet, and learning supported by other technologies (Nguyen, 2015).

Moreover, designing online courses requires several considerations. For example, the quality of the learning environment, the ease of using the learning platform, the learning outcomes to be achieved, instructor support to assist and motivate students to engage with the course material, peer interaction, class participation, type of assessments (Paechter & Maier, 2010), not to mention training of the instructor in adopting and introducing new teaching methods online (Lundberg et al., 2008). In online learning, instructors are more facilitators of learning. On the other hand, traditional F2F classes are structured in such a way that the instructor delivers knowledge, is better able to gauge understanding and interest of students, can engage in class activities, and can provide immediate feedback on clarifying questions during the class. Additionally, the designing of traditional F2F courses can be less time consuming for instructors compared to online courses (Navarro, 2000).

The Covid‐19 pandemic has been a wake‐up call to many countries regarding their capacity to cater for mass online education. This situation has been further complicated in developing countries, such as South Africa, who lack the digital infrastructure for the majority of the population. The extended lockdown in South Africa saw most of the universities with mainly in‐person teaching scrambling to source hardware (e.g. laptops, internet access), software (e.g. Microsoft packages, data analysis packages) and internet data for disadvantaged students in order for the semester to recommence. Not only has the pandemic revealed the already stark inequality within the tertiary student population, but it has also revealed that high internet data costs in Philippines may perpetuate this inequality, making online education relatively inaccessible for disadvantaged students.

The benefits of education on economic development are well established in the literature (Gyimah‐Brempong, 2011), ranging from health awareness (Glick et al., 2009), improved technological innovations, to increased capacity development and employment opportunities for the youth (Anyanwu, 2013; Emediegwu, 2021). One of the ways in which inequality is perpetuated in South Africa, and Africa as a whole, is through access to education (Anyanwu, 2016; Coetzee, 2014; Tchamyou et al., 2019); therefore, understanding the obstacles that students face in transitioning to online learning can be helpful in ensuring more equal access to education.

Using students' responses from survey questions and the difference in the average grades between pre‐lockdown and post‐lockdown, our findings indicate that students' performance in the online setting was positively associated with better internet access. Accessing assisted study material, such as narrated slides or recordings of the online lectures, also helped students. We also find lower academic performance for students who reported finding transitioning to online difficult and for those who expressed a preference for self‐study (i.e. reading through class slides and notes) over assisted study (i.e. joining live lectures or watching recorded lectures). The average grades between pre‐lockdown and post‐lockdown were about two points and three points lower for those who reported transitioning to online teaching difficult and for those who indicated a preference for self‐study, respectively. The findings suggest that improving the quality of internet infrastructure and providing assisted learning can be beneficial in reducing the adverse effects of the Covid‐19 pandemic on learning outcomes.

Several studies that have also compared the effectiveness of online learning and F2F classes encounter methodological weaknesses, such as small samples, not controlling for demographic characteristics, and substantial differences in course materials and assessments between online and F2F contexts. To address these shortcomings, our study is based on a relatively large sample of students and includes demographic characteristics such as age, gender and perceived family income classification. The lecturer and course materials also remained similar in the online and F2F contexts. A significant proportion of our students indicated that they never had online learning experience before. Less than 20% of the students in the sample had previous experience with online learning. This highlights the fact that online education is still relatively new to most students in our sample.

Online learning is a form of distance education which mainly involves internet‐based education where courses are offered synchronously (i.e. live sessions online) and/or asynchronously (i.e. students access course materials online in their own time, which is associated with the more traditional distance education). On the other hand, traditional F2F learning is real time or synchronous learning. In a physical classroom, instructors engage with the students in real time, while in the online format instructors can offer real time lectures through learning management systems (e.g. Blackboard Collaborate), or record the lectures for the students to watch later. Purely online courses are offered entirely over the internet, while blended learning combines traditional F2F classes with learning over the internet, and learning supported by other technologies (Nguyen, 2015).

Moreover, designing online courses requires several considerations. For example, the quality of the learning environment, the ease of using the learning platform, the learning outcomes to be achieved, instructor support to assist and motivate students to engage with the course material, peer interaction, class participation, type of assessments (Paechter & Maier, 2010), not to mention training of the instructor in adopting and introducing new teaching methods online (Lundberg et al., 2008). In online learning, instructors are more facilitators of learning. On the other hand, traditional F2F classes are structured in such a way that the instructor delivers knowledge, is better able to gauge understanding and interest of students, can engage in class activities, and can provide immediate feedback on clarifying questions during the class. Additionally, the designing of traditional F2F courses can be less time consuming for instructors compared to online courses (Navarro, 2000).

21st Century Filipino Teacher

Things are changing in this modern society at an epidemic rate. The world is starting to become much more interconnected and technology is constantly changing the world. We now live in an increasingly different, globalized, and complicated media saturated culture. So this Technological overthrow will have a greater change in education. Our students are facing many difficulties like increased population, climate change, health deficiency, primary poverty and other environmental changes. Therefore, this technological revolution, social, economic and globalization changes have intended for new changes and developments in 21st century teaching and learning.

The 21st century teacher looks forward to the future. They are aware of the ever-changing trends in technology and are in tune of what the future may bring to education. A good 21st century teacher is aware of the career opportunities that will be in the coming years for their students, and are always advocating towards forward thinking and planning to ensure all students will not be left behind.

Teaching in the 21st Century is nothing like anyone before could have anticipated. The modern-day teacher cannot afford to think outside of the box; he or she must build a new one. The skills necessary for the 21st Century leader are clear; the leader must be aware of his or her followers’ needs, while raising the motivation and morality of both parties. In order for this to occur, a transformational approach is suggested (Northouse 2013). The contemporary leader must encourage others to leave the outdated ideas of a classroom and student engagement and performance, and usher them into the new age of schooling.

Teachers must focus more on critical thinking skills and less on content. As opposed to identifying author’s purpose in an essay, the student will create an essay, wiki, or blog that demonstrates his or her ability to establish and understand a purpose and argument. At the end of each year or critical task, the student portfolio will demonstrate not only the best product, but a progression, and evidence of the student’s learning over the course of a specific period of time.

Students should participate in projects that promote global sustainability, and incorporates science and mathematics in a meaningful way. Students can no longer afford the rote memorization of topics, culture, and ideas from other countries, but create projects with students from other countries that have a global impact. It is more than sky with a peer around the world, but collaborating with a partner around the world to make it a better place.

Whether teaching is an art or a science, it is no easy task. A good teacher takes you from where you are and stretches your mind, ever onward, to the next step, the next insight, the next glimpse of knowledge. Good teachers reflect and evaluate their own practice, success and misgivings. Critical reflection is a key quality of effective teachers: “The ability to reflect on what, why and how things are done and to adapt and refine practice is essential for successful teaching and learning” (Rayford, 2010).