Health Promotion and Sexology Student and Teaching Staff Perspectives of Online Learning and Teaching During COVID-19: A Mixed Methods Study

Participants

Students were eligible to participate if they were enrolled in one of the following courses or units in Semester 1, 2020: Bachelor of Science (Health Promotion) (n = 119), Graduate Certificate and Graduate Diploma in Health Promotion (n = 30), Graduate Diploma and Master of Sexology (n = 106), and the Introduction to Sexology Attitudes and Values unit (n = 81). Eligible students were invited to complete an online survey, via an announcement sent through Blackboard.

Data Collection

The online survey utilized Qualtrics (Qualtrics, 2021). Survey questions included demographic and enrolment data (gender identity, age, course, usual attendance mode [internal/fully online] and study load [full time, part time]), experiences with online learning technology, attitudes toward remote internal unit delivery, challenges encountered during remote internal unit delivery, and successes with specific platforms or techniques. Question types included closed (dichotomous, Likert-type scales) and open-ended questions.

Data Analysis

Quantitative data were stored and analyzed in SPSS (IBM, 2021) and summarized using descriptive statistics by course of study. Comparisons were also made between students who had studied online previously versus students who had not studied online previously. Open-ended responses from the survey were analyzed using NVivo (QRS International, 2021). Exploratory analysis was conducted using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) method of thematic analysis. A member of the research team read through the data set to become familiar with the content and identify broad similarities and differences in the data. Three members of the research team met to discuss categories, and data were then coded into themes using a general inductive approach (Thomas, 2006).

Participants

Convenience sampling was used to recruit participants. Phase 1 eligibility criteria was applied to Phase 2 student recruitment. Students were notified about the project and invited to participate via an announcement sent through Blackboard. Teaching staff were eligible to participate if they were employed in one of the following roles: teaching academic (TA), teaching and research academic (TRA), or casual academic (CA). Eligible teaching staff were emailed directly and invited to participate.

Data Collection

Student focus groups were segmented according to discipline (health promotion or sexology) and teaching staff focus groups according to employment type (continuing/tenured/permanent [TA/TRA] or casual [CA]). The desired size for each focus group was 6 to 10 participants each, consistent with guidelines for appropriate sample size for focus groups (Liamputtong, 2015). Semistructured discussion guides were developed for the focus groups. Students were asked to share their experience of remote internal course delivery as well as barriers and enablers to effective learning online. The discussion guide used for teaching staff focus groups was adapted from the student focus group discussion guide to consider the teaching perspective. Demographic information was also collected from each participant. Student focus groups were conducted online via Blackboard Collaborate Ultra (Blackboard Inc., 2021), and teaching staff focus groups were conducted via Microsoft Teams (Microsoft, 2021). Each focus group was for 30 to 45 minutes and facilitated by a member of the research team. Participants were given the option to turn their cameras on. All discussions were recorded and transcribed verbatim and reviewed alongside the audio for completeness and accuracy.

Data Analysis

Qualitative data were analyzed using NVivo (QRS International, 2021). Exploratory analysis was conducted using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) method of thematic analysis. A member of the research team read through the data set to become familiar with the content and identify broad themes in the data. Three members of the research team met to discuss categories, and data were then coded into themes using a general inductive approach (Thomas, 2006).

Participants

Enrolled students (n = 81) were required to submit two reflection papers as separate routine assessment tasks. At the time of the study, the unit was offered as an option to students throughout the university.

Data Collection

The one-page reflection task asked students questions about unit likes and dislikes and plans for application of unit learning. The request to conduct document analysis was made to students after the normal assessment task had been submitted, graded, and marks released to students. An announcement was posted in the requisite Blackboard unit site. Students were invited to edit their second (final) reflection paper by removing all identifiable information and submitting it anonymously via a Qualtrics link (Qualtrics, 2021). These submissions were entirely separate from the usual process of submitting this assessment piece for grading.

Data Analysis

Qualitative data were analyzed using NVivo (QRS International, 2021). A member of the research team read through the data set to become familiar with the content and identify broad similarities and differences in the data. Deductive analysis was used to summarize and organize data based on study objectives (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005).

Face-to-Face Contact Provides a Sense of Community

Students suggested that the internal study mode provided a greater sense of community when compared with the remote internal mode. Face-to-face contact provided numerous benefits over online learning, such as forming new connections with other students, easier engagement with students and teaching staff, and enhanced discussions during class. The lack of social support affected negatively on the personal lives of some students, for example,

I didn’t realise most of my friends were from uni, so all of a sudden, I was not able to see a big chunk of people that I was really looking forward to seeing after the break. So, it did impact my personal life that way. (SX)

The lack of social connection also affected negatively on learning for students who struggled with issues related to extrinsic and identified motivation as well as a perceived lack of an accessible learning community. Consequently, students also cited challenges with learner self-regulation: “Just finding motivation and trying to engage online with the material. I still feel quite disconnected from the course and the people so that has been the biggest challenge not really feeling part of it anymore” (SX).

More than one third of the survey participants (37.5%, n = 12) disagreed with the statement “During the period of ‘Remote Internal’ delivery I was able to easily connect with and maintain a sense of community with teaching staff,” which supports the qualitative findings. Similarly, more than half of the survey participants (56.3%, n = 18) agreed with the statement “COVID-19 caused great upheaval to my personal life.” A greater proportion of students who had never studied online previously agreed with this statement (62.5%, n = 10) when compared with students who had studied online previously (50%, n = 8).

Online Learning Is Better When It Is Interactive

Online learning was most effective when it was highly interactive in design and delivery. Students enjoyed the ability to interact with peers and teaching staff in the online environment as well as having access to a range of platforms and activities during their learning. Some students commented on the importance of live delivery to be “able to talk with [teaching staff] directly about any questions I have for the unit” (SX) and the “option for live tutorials when students cannot attend face-to-face so we can remain connected and not isolated” (HP). Other students discussed the usefulness of certain platforms and their functions, such as the “chat function, polls and the whiteboard functions during Collaborate Ultra sessions” (HP) and “Collaborate . . . for group projects” (HP).

Survey results support the focus group findings. Almost half of the survey participants (46.9%, n = 15) agreed with the statement “Interactive activities during the Collaborate Ultra sessions work best for my learning style.” Similarly, 43.8% (n = 14) disagreed with the statement “Lectures during the Collaborate Ultra sessions work best for my learning style (i.e., lecture presentations without activities and discussion).”

Online Learning Is Convenient

Some students enjoyed the convenience of online learning afforded by the remote internal mode. Students found benefits in greater flexibility around study times and personal commitments, reduced travel times, and increased financial savings via reduced travel and parking costs. The additional time meant that students “had more time to study” (SX) and could be “more focused as I don’t have to drive a long-distance home which tends to make me feel less motivated” (HP). One student explained the impact of “remote learning” on their grades: “[I like] less contact hours or having the flexibility to work at home if you need to. I got a lot out of having that extra spare time and I didn’t feel that remote learning affected my grades” (HP).

Delivery Mode Affects Student Willingness to Contribute to Discussions

Online discussions were favored by some students and viewed negatively by others. During the remote internal mode, the use of technology allowed self-identified shy students to contribute more to discussions in the virtual classroom, whereas other students felt more comfortable contributing to discussions in face-to-face classes. One student highlighted the enabling nature of the chat room in Collaborate Ultra:

I get nervous speaking up in class when raising points or asking questions, so the chat box on Blackboard Collaborate made it easier to answer the questions for me because I didn’t have to speak in front of the class. (SX)

Another student explained the impact of face-to-face interaction on making friends and feeling comfortable contributing to discussions, through face-to-face support provided by peers, particularly where there was a perception of material being challenging: “I found it quite intimidating giving my opinion online whilst discussing sensitive topics. I felt more vulnerable and therefore less engaged when I think I could have thrived in a classroom environment” (SX).

These opposing qualitative findings are supported by the survey results. More than half of the participants (53.1%, n = 17) agreed with the statement “I contribute more to the discussion when the class is face-to-face,” whereas almost half (43.8%, n = 14) disagreed with the statement “I contribute more to the discussion when the class is online.” More than half of the participants (59.4%, n = 19) agreed with the statement “I am more comfortable using the chat function than I am turning on my camera and microphone to ask a question and/or contribute to a discussion.”

Students Enjoy a Mixture of Teaching Patterns

Students who preferred the internal mode still enjoyed elements of online learning and benefitted from some online activities. From the students’ perspective, face-to-face classes and units work best when they incorporate prerecorded lectures, live delivery with interactivity, discussion boards, online meetings, and chat rooms. One student commented on the importance of being able to ask questions and seek feedback from teaching staff during online sessions:

If you miss class as an internal student you should be able to watch the live recording through Blackboard at home. Also being able to ask questions through the chat box live from home so that they can discuss it live during the internal class. (SX)

Similarly, another student explained the usefulness of feedback during group activities: “We had the group discussion board where the teacher staff could monitor and see our collaboration as well and it was helpful to get their input” (HP).

The majority (68.8%, n = 22) of survey participants agreed with the statement “A combination of activities and lecture content during the Collaborate Ultra sessions works best for my learning style,” which supports the qualitative findings. A greater proportion of students who had never studied online previously agreed with this statement (81.2%, n = 13) when compared with students who had studied online previously (56.2%, n = 9).

Technological Issues Create Barriers to Effective Learning

The remote internal mode relied on efficient and effective platforms, adequate internet connections, functioning hardware, and sound technological skills possessed by students and teaching staff. If even one of these key ingredients was missing or not functioning well, students experienced barriers to effective learning. Examples of issues include “constantly having to restart due to technology problems” (SX) and the “inability to see when someone else is going to talk” (SX) due to time lags. Another student explained that issues with technology made learning less enjoyable: “I didn’t particularly enjoy Collaborate Ultra or live tutorials. I didn’t get much out of them because it was very slow to use and complete activities” (HP).

Connections Matter

When reflecting on their remote internal experience, teaching staff members considered building connections to be rewarding, natural, and with deeper meaning when teaching is delivered face-to-face. Teaching staff indicated that mentoring and supervision relationships are more easily formed when teaching staff interact face-to-face with students, as staff who teach online “lose that opportunity to build those relationships because you don’t get that when you’re sitting at your desktop, recording a lecture, or doing the online stuff” (TA/TRA). One teaching staff member explained feedback from students who “choose to be face-to-face because there is some other opportunities with being face-to-face around establishing a relationship with academics [which can be] very hard in an online environment to get a real connection at that sort of level” (TA/TRA). Another explained the importance of student–teaching staff connections when graduates are seeking referee reports for employment opportunities: “I need to know who that person is so that I can actually do that with confidence or choose not to. Sometimes I’ll decline because I don’t feel like I can write a praiseworthy review” (TA/TRA).

Teaching staff also shared their perspectives on the importance of students connecting with each other. When face-to-face, students have opportunities for “peer support, the connections for future career and just for life friendships that . . . are valued by internal students and sometimes online students . . . regret that they can’t have that” (TA/TRA). When strong connections are formed between students, they “trust that safe environment” (CA), which is beneficial in the classroom for discussions and group work.

Face-to-Face Delivery Enhances Engagement

Teaching staff compared the engagement levels of face-to-face and online delivery methods. Face-to-face methods provide more “capacity to be more organic, flexible in teaching [and] to be able to tailor materials on the fly to [answer] students’ questions” (TA/TRA). One teaching staff member explained the impact on engagement levels that would potentially result from internal lectures being replaced by prerecorded lectures:

I actually worked very hard to make lectures interactive. We stop, we pause, microphones are handed round so online students get full class discussion. And now that’s really inhibited my teaching to think “Well, I can only do what I can be recorded to do now.” (TA/TRA)

Another teaching staff member explained the difficulty of demonstrating discipline-specific skills to students when delivering online during the remote internal mode: “I like to be modelling that engaging facilitator, and it was like using technology that wasn’t able to really let that happen” (CA).

Teaching staff highly value student feedback during teaching delivery, which was a missing element during the remote internal mode. Teaching staff did not receive nonverbal cues during online classes, for example,

The tutor or lecturer says something and the students don’t get it and they kind of raise eyebrows at each other and then they have a little chat. It’s very hard when everyone’s got their videos off to get any of that opportunity for students. (TA/TRA)

The visual cues received in face-to-face classes provide teaching staff with the ability to “go back into an idea and say, ‘did everyone actually really get that?’” (TA/TRA). The lack of feedback during the remote internal mode left teaching staff “not knowing whether what you’re delivering is being received” and “constantly doubting yourself” (CA).

Learning Outcomes Are a Priority for Teaching Staff

Teaching staff noted that universities should prioritize teaching delivery methods that best support students to achieve learning outcomes. Participants discussed the potential move to online learning post-COVID-19 and the tension of “budget trimming . . . [and] . . . not being driven by good pedagogy” (TA/TRA). Under financial constraints, “it does seem cheaper to do it online” (TA/TRA); however, the quality of teaching, the cognitive load on students and teaching staff, and the impact on workloads were raised as concerns, in addition to the learning experience for students. As one teaching staff member noted,

It’s not about easier. It’s about what works for the students, what works for the learning outcomes of the unit, what works for what you’re trying to achieve within the unit. As soon as you give up on that, you’ve lost really. (TA/TRA)

The rapid move to online teaching and learning highlighted the importance of face-to-face delivery for developing practical skills and discipline-specific competencies. Several participants noted that teaching practical skills is more difficult online, stating that there is “no way that could be replicated in [Blackboard] Collaborate” (TA/TRA). Teaching practical skills to fully online students ordinarily requires sufficient planning and partnerships with external stakeholders to ensure that the learning outcomes are achieved. During the remote internal mode, some practical internal units and activities were substituted for fully online units, which “can’t happen . . . in an accredited degree” (TA/TRA). The DHPS courses are “training the next generation of professionals” (TA/TRA) in health promotion and sexology, and the university is “not just producing people with great degrees, we’re also helping to replace ourselves in the future” (TA/TRA). One participant discussed the importance of delivery mode for certain content areas and units with sensitive topics:

The subject matter that we discuss . . . requires a lot of engagement. You just don’t get the same engagement if someone is typing on the screen or wanting them to talk over the microphone on topics they feel that they can only discuss in with the safety of others. Yeah, so, I just don’t think that it is a good choice for this particular area of public health. (TA/TRA)

Online Delivery Needs Effective Supports

Teaching staff members explained that effective online teaching needs to be supported by effective and efficient technology and staff resources. Participants discussed the range of technical skills and experience of teaching staff within the DHPS who are overall “quite digitally savvy . . . [and] . . . quite good at embracing technology” (TA/TRA); hence, for some, moving online “wasn’t a massive challenge ‘cause I taught an online unit for about six years prior to that, so I had run Blackboard Collaborate pretty much sort of separately from the internal unit” (CA). For those who had limited experience with online teaching, the remote internal mode gave “access to a wider repertoire of online technologies that the University had” (TA/TRA). The most frequently used university-supported platforms during remote internal mode were Blackboard Collaborate Ultra, Cisco WebEx (enterprise videoconferencing service) (Cisco, 2021), and GroupMap (a real-time online brainstorming and group decision-making tool; GroupMap, 2021).

Participants highlighted that the limitations of online teaching lie in the lack of “consistent backup and support of IT [information technology staff] and whoever it is if something does go wrong” (TA/TRA) within the university. As one teaching staff member stated, “I don’t have a problem with doing online and face-to-face [teaching] provided of course the infrastructure works immediately and without any issue” (CA). Technological and connectivity issues at the students’ end further complicated matters when “not only are you relying on your expertise in your content expertise, you’re then juggling all this technology together with students going ‘mine’s just dropped out’ and ‘my Internet is not working’” (TA/TRA). These issues not only affected content delivery but also the assessment process:

Students presenting through Collaborate live, losing their connectivity again, not being able to use camera because it didn’t have one or their gadgets, laptops were broken, and it was quite difficult to mark them as well. Also considering that you know it’s all online and they may not have the ability to have those gadgets required for that assessment. (CA)

Students Have Online Privacy Concerns

A significant engagement barrier during the remote internal mode noted by teaching staff was online privacy concerns held by students. Some students were “very aware and concerned about their online presence . . . [and] . . . aware they’re being recorded, even the chat box” (TA/TRA). Teaching staff suggested that online students “don’t have the capacity to blend into a classroom, and if they are actually on video or on mic then they are front and centre” (TA/TRA), which limited their level of engagement. Some teaching staff members received feedback from students stating that “they wish to engage, but due to privacy reasons and in case somebody may be recording them, they were not able to open up and engage” (CA). Students expressed similar privacy concerns during online learning, due to the presence of family members, friends, and strangers if studying in public. One student also explained their concerns regarding other online learners: “I don’t know whether I’m being recorded and don’t feel safe and comfortable” (CA).