Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science

35(8): 1-14, 2022; Article no.JESBS.89022

ISSN: 2456-981X
(Past name: British Journal of Education, Society Behavioural Science,
Past ISSN: 2278-0998)

Comparison of Online Learning during the COVID-19

Pandemic against the Traditional Face-to-Face Learning
Experience for a STEM Related Subject, Analytical
Mathematics
Anastasia Sofroniou a∗ and Bhairavi Premnath a
a School of Computing and Engineering, University of West London, St. Mary’s Road, London W5

5RF, United Kingdom.

Authors’ contributions
This work was carried out in collaboration between both the authors. Both authors have read and
approved the final manuscript.

Article Information
DOI: 10.9734/JESBS/2022/v35i830440
Open Peer Review History:
This journal follows the Advanced Open Peer Review policy. Identity of the Reviewers, Editor(s) and additional
Reviewers, peer review comments, different versions of the manuscript, comments of the editors, etc are
available here: https://www.sdiarticle5.com/review-history/89022

Received 01 May 2022

Accepted 03 July 2022
Original Research Article Published 05 July 2022

ABSTRACT
The Coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic put a halt provisionally to face-to-face teaching throughout
the educational sector impeding in addition, university students from receiving their traditional
on campus teaching learning experience. Educators, academics, and the higher institutional
authorities had to act fast and change their mode of teaching delivery to online platforms, with
many students transferring their learning habits and customs to various online mediums and tools.
In view of the struggles and adjustments many students underwent with this new method of
teaching, a research study was conducted to identify whether online learning had an effect on
student performance for a Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) related
module. On this purpose, this paper evaluates different statistical test measures to compare
the two different teaching techniques adopted by a university foundation level module, Analytical
Mathematics. Results from the pursued quantitative analysis show a decrease in the success of
students’ performance whilst receiving online teaching, suggesting a lesser impact on improved
learning compared to the customary face-to-face delivery for this specific module. With regards to
engagement, observations from the qualitative analysis of the study show a lack of involvement and
participation from students with their lecturer and peers whilst in an online environment, echoing its
influence on student performance. The deductions of the analyses of this study, emphasize that the
necessary transition to online delivery and learning during the pandemic did lead to a challenging
and negative experience on students and their performance for this STEM related subject.

*Corresponding author: E-mail: [email protected];

 Sofroniou and Premnath; JESBS, 35(8): 1-14, 2022; Article no.JESBS.89022

Keywords: Mathematics-STEM; coronavirus; online and face-to-face learning.

2020 Mathematics Subject Classification: 53C25; 83C05; 57N16.

1 INTRODUCTION these two types of forms of learning is key to

build a similar environment for the students to
In December 2019, a virus was found in rely on in the future. With the whole world going
China which later caused a global pandemic into lockdown in 2019, UK was also compelled
in March 2020, causing everyone’s daily lives to follow the rules to prevent spreading of the
to change [1]. Educational institutions had to virus. With all the disruptions, the government
change their ways of operations, allowing for organised funds and aids to help all the sectors
online teaching to be introduced, thus replacing around country. The education sector moved
temporarily face-to-face teaching. This study completely to online teaching and the students
will begin with an overview as to the different were expected to follow classes from their home
ways educators adapted in their teaching and surroundings [6].
will reference the challenges faced with this
change of teaching environment. It was a Many students immediately faced issues as they
rapid transition from traditional to online teaching did not have the necessary technological tools
whereby assignments and examinations were and mature internet connection to attend online
also submitted electronically and teaching classes [7]. Students were forced to adapt to
videos became a live online or pre-recorded these changes quickly and yet some struggled to
phenomenon [2]. cope with the stress it caused, experiencing also
perhaps for the first time examinations online [8].
The world was put on hold during Covid 19 and
the education sector was one of the hardest The face-to-face traditional way of teaching has
to be hit due to this pandemic. The students been employed for many years everywhere
were forced to follow their courses through whereby students physically attend the classes
online classes from their homes [3]. The Higher and lectures. The educators teach and
Education Providers (HEP) were put in a position explain the subject material making sure that
to introduce new methods to deliver lessons students understand the concepts well. In this
with the tuition fees of students remaining as environment, students clarify their queries and
for a face-to-face experience [4]. Many students get answers, feedback straight away without
around the world suffered adversely due to the any delay in time [[9]]. The traditional classes
pandemic including the millions of students in the take place at a specific time and location
UK. where students need to be physically present
in order to attend them. Students are also given
The Universities had limited time and resources opportunities to participate in group activities and
to come up with a plan to give the same education presentations to improve their communication
for their students. They also had to face certain and group work skills.
issues which were supposed to be addressed
beforehand. The revenue from the international Online teaching in most subjects is a fairly
students who come to the country for higher new approach of virtual learning in the higher
education plays a vital rule towards the UK education sector. Here the academics or
economy [5] and the pandemic restricted the educators would normally pre-record or record
arrival of students from other countries and hence lectures in immediate time with students being
HEP had to satisfy the students from all around able to attend their classes from home through an
the world. The pressure was immense to plan online platform. In the case of missing an online
and execute within the limited time restrictions. lecture, this could be watched later thus providing
a very flexible learning environment [10]. The
During this unprecedented time around the world, benefit of this teaching method is that it can help
the importance and validity of an analysis on students who have other responsibilities whilst at

2
 Sofroniou and Premnath; JESBS, 35(8): 1-14, 2022; Article no.JESBS.89022

home to manage the time between the studies this type of teaching environment, the direct
and other tasks. The economical situations can supervision of educators can help the students
affect a student’s online learning vastly and many positively to grasp the concepts [18].
even faced hardships with using digital devices
and tools [11]. According to Alonso et al. [19] and Holenko et
al. [20] the most effective method of teaching
The main objective of this paper is to understand is that of a blended learning approach, which
the two forms of teaching presented to students combines live e-learning, self study, and face-
for this module and how the adopted methods to-face traditional teaching delivery. Blended
had an impact on their academic performance teaching is increasingly showing dependency on
towards their education as well as highlighting its e-learning whereby the use of technology like
drawbacks. internet, Information and Communication and
media are used to deliver this way of teaching.
1.1 Literature Review During online delivery, educators may provide live
According to Chiodini [12] due to the pandemic online or pre-recorded lectures which students
many sectors around the world were affected can watch at their own time at home and may
including the education sector. Many developing pause, forward or rewind the recording when they
countries faced many technological and financial wish [21]. This type of teaching allows students to
pressure to provide a better education even use technology in their learning and it is the main
during the tough times of the pandemic [13]. platform for the communication between students
As the whole world was in lockdown many and educators. Communication and course
students’ mental well being in learning was design play a vital role in the online learning
deteriorating and this put more pressure on the courses [22]. Online mathematics education
education providers to tackle this issue [14]. poses particular challenges in terms of both the
There are many issues students had to endure hardware and software necessary for effective
in their online learning during the period of teaching, due to issues with mathematical
the pandemic. In some hard hit countries, the symbols and notation, among others [23].
students did not have proper internet connection Flipped classroom is another type of blended
and the necessary tools to continue their studies teaching where students can watch videos or
effectively. In some countries many had to pay look at resources before coming to lectures [24].
more money to get the required data for the Although online/e-learning techniques may have
internet provider to download large files including positive effects on students’ learning experience,
notes and videos. Many, unfortunately, faced there is still limited evidence about how this
financial struggles to pay for these additional works in mathematically related subjects [25],
technological requirements. hence this paper compliments existing literature
and provides a comparison of online against
Traditional, blended and online learning are traditional using statistical analysis on students’
examples of types of teaching. The concept of performance during the pandemic.
a traditional way of teaching is considered here
as face-to-face with the presence of educators In this 21st century, especially after the
and students [15]. Educators prepare lectures pandemic many institutions are contemplating of
beforehand and give assessments to students combining both traditional and online learning
after the content is delivered and it is believed that methods towards their teachings delivery [26].
there is more engagement amongst academics According to Moorhouse [27], the educators
and students in this manner [16]. The educator faced challenges during this shift of teaching
provides tips to help develop students’ knowledge methods and perhaps in the future, academics
and students can sort out queries without delay can learn from the drawbacks faced and provide
by speaking to the educator directly. In this type a more successful teaching environment for all.
of teaching, group activities can occur which For instance, in the article by Ortiz [28], the
allows students to develop skills such as group author explains about the difficulties the educator
work and communication [17]. In addition with faced when preparing and teaching students

3
 Sofroniou and Premnath; JESBS, 35(8): 1-14, 2022; Article no.JESBS.89022

online. Thus this transition of teaching from face- notes, online discussion forums and problem
to-face to online has to be smooth and lucrative sheets and then the other group was taught
for both students and the lecturers. by the lecturer through the traditional face-to-
face environment for the duration of the topic. A
2 METHODOLOGY written assessment in the form of an examination
was given at the end of both teaching deliveries
An empirical and statistical evaluation into of this chapter in order to compare the impact on
these two different teaching techniques, were student performance.
considered for the university foundation level
module called ’Analytical Mathematics’. With the 2.1 Software and Results
help of questionnaires for qualitative analysis and
data gathered from exams of two consecutive Processing
academic years for quantitative purpose, a For the qualitative component of this paper, the
comparison of online learning during the data were inputted into Excel and R studio
pandemic against the traditional face-to-face for a sound analysis. The graphs of each
learning delivery is presented to examine their question were plotted for descriptive purpose.
effects on student performance. In addition, This gives a preliminary viewpoint to compare
the quantitative analysis process consisted of the two factors, in order to compliment the final
examining the following cases: outcomes. Measures of central tendency were
(I) Comparison of results of Academic Year needed to provide the foundations for further
2019/2020 vs Academic Year 2020/2021 analysis. The R studio was then used for
comparing the two data sets obtained from the
Initially results of two cohorts of students were student performance on the chosen topic of the
considered from the Academic Years 2019/2020 module for two consecutive years. One with the
who received the traditional teaching, and face-to-face teaching during the year 2019/2020
2020/2021 who received online teaching. Group and the other with the online teaching during the
A (Academic year 2019/20) had a sample size year 2020/2021.
17 and Group B (Academic year 2020/21) had a
sample size of 16.
3 RESULTS AND DISCU-
(II) Comparison of results within the same
cohort, Academic Year 2020/2021 SSION
In order to tackle the issue of perhaps 3.1 Statistical Measures for
different level of students’ entrance abilities, Analysis
a supplementary analysis was performed.
Specifically, for the same module a topic from the The obtained data was inputted into R and
syllabus was chosen to perform a comparison for different tests were calculated to identify the
the two different modes of learning environment. most effective mode of teaching for the students.
”Simultaneous Equations”, a chapter in Basic Likelihood ratio, t-test, chi-squared test are
Algebra that is not too cumbersome or too chosen and a performance ratio is also calculated
advanced to comprehend, as it deals with solving to provide validity. The likelihood ratio in effect
a linear system of equations was extracted produces chi-squared test value with the p-
from the syllabus to analyse the effect of this values. Furthermore, a hypothesis testing
intervention way of teaching. For the fairness is included where the null and alternative
of results the class was split into two groups hypothesis are considered for the two different
where one group resumed with its online teaching Academic Years 2019/2020 vs 2020/2021 as:
and the other group experienced face-to-face
teaching only for the aforementioned chapter. H0 : There is no difference in the mean
The online group continued to be taught online assessment results of the two cohorts,
incorporating pre-recorded videos, online lecture Academic Years 2019/2020 vs 2020/2021.

4
 Sofroniou and Premnath; JESBS, 35(8): 1-14, 2022; Article no.JESBS.89022

H1 : There is a difference in the mean and alternative hypothesis considered for this
assessment results of the two cohorts, instance are:
Academic Years 2019/2020 vs 2020/2021.
H0 : There is no difference in the mean
assessment results of the two teaching
Depending on the statistical outcome the
methods for the same cohort.
significance of this test is given, based on
H1 : There is a difference in the mean
the significance level allocated. In addition,
assessment results of the two teaching
a hypothesis testing is also performed for the
methods for the same cohort.
results of the test from the same cohort, taken
on simultaneous equations, of the Academic The effect size which is used to give valid
Year 2020/2021 where they were divided into evidence towards the considered hypothesis is
two groups of similar competencies and were found and is calculated using the relation below
taught through both methods separately. The null [29, 30],

Dif f erence of the means between the two groups

ef f ect size =
P ooled standard deviation
To add to the statistical analysis of this paper, a consideration of the performance ratio is chosen to
exemplify the difference if any of the performance of students on simultaneous equations comparative
to the rest of the questions of the final assessment [17],

T otal %marks f rom simultaneous equation question

P erf ormance Ratio =
T otal %marks f rom rest of the questions in the exam

3.2 (I) Analysis of results of Academic Year 2019/2020 vs Academic

Year 2020/2021
Initially box plots summarising the measures of central tendency and dispersion for the accumulated
data were constructed and presented as Fig. 1 below.

Fig. 1. Box plots of traditional face-to-face and online teachings

The figure above depicts the impact effect of traditional face-to-face teaching compared to online
teaching based on students’ assessment results. It is evident that students achieved higher results in
the academic year where traditional teaching was dominant.

5
 Sofroniou and Premnath; JESBS, 35(8): 1-14, 2022; Article no.JESBS.89022

Quantitative Analysis : (a) t-test

A t-test is a statistical method which provides with evidence to show whether the considered data
set can agree or disagree with the null or alternative hypothesis focused in this paper. This test
particularly studies whether there is any difference between the two independent groups and performing
t-testing, the following results are tabulated, as shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Results of t-test

As the p value is less than the significance level, 0.05, the null hypothesis is rejected and thus
accepting that there is a difference in the mean assessment results of the two cohorts.

(b) Chi-Squared test

The two independent groups studied here are used for the chi-squared test and the data inserted into
R in order to complete the analysis. The following table, Table 2, presents these outputs.

Table 2. Results of Chi-Squared test

The p value shown in the above table is much less than the significance level 0.05. Thus null
hypothesis will be rejected again proving the validation of presence of a difference in mean between
the two cohorts. In order to compliment statistical hypothesis testing, the effect size was found to
take the value of 0.31, which under the guidelines of Cohen [31], this suggests a medium effect for
the group of data. Therefore, around approximately 63% of the values in the mean of the traditional
teaching results fall above the average of the mean online teaching results.

6
 Sofroniou and Premnath; JESBS, 35(8): 1-14, 2022; Article no.JESBS.89022

(c) Performance Ratio

The performance ratio was obtained by comparing the question relating to simultaneous equation
against the other questions of the assessments over the two Academic Years. The two groups
representing the consecutive academic years were again considered and each ratio value was obtained
for all the students. The figure below portrays the performance ratio values for the two analogous
groups. It is clear that, group A’s ratio values show that more students performed better in the
simultaneous equations questions compared to the remaining questions of the exam.
Fig. 2 shows that the student group that had only face-to-face traditional teaching in the Academic
year 2019/2020, had more students with high performance ratio in comparison to the online teaching
group of the Academic Year 2020/2021.

Fig. 2. Comparison of the performance ratios for both academic years

(d) Categorical Analysis using binary values

Categorical Analysis is a useful way to deal with categorical data. Categorical variables are those
that can be measured using only limited number of variables [32]. In this paper a binary logistic
categorical analysis is considered.

The model was constructed by examining if students’ results improved or not with the intervention of
online teaching. If a student’s assessment mark was improved with traditional teaching then it is given
a value of ”1” but if it did not show any improvement then it was labelled with a ”0”. The results from
the Table 3 shows a negative value for the online teaching for the same module during the pandemic.
This value of -0.009 shows that an increase in one unit of the ”variable online teaching” reduces
the student performance by 0.9% (exp(-0.009) = 0.991 ) whilst the other factors are kept constant.
This outcome suggests that a negative impact of online teaching and learning exists on students’
performance.

The ”face-to-face variable” has a positive value and this shows that an increase in one unit of the
”variable face-to-face teaching” increases the student performance by 1.7% (exp(0.017) =1.017)

7
 Sofroniou and Premnath; JESBS, 35(8): 1-14, 2022; Article no.JESBS.89022

Table 3. Results of chi-squared test with categorical variable

whilst keeping other factors constant, deducing that face-to-face teaching actually had a positive
impact on improvement of results.

3.3 (II) Analysis of results within the same cohort Academic Year
2020/2021
This analysis is performed for the same cohort of students, during the pandemic, where the students
were divided into two groups, with one group having only online teaching and other group having a
face-to-face delivery for the specific topic of simultaneous equations. A comparison of results of the
assessments, summarised in Fig. 3, was undertaken in order to distinguish any improvements in
marks due to the alternative way of teaching.

Quantitative Analysis : (a) Chi-Squared test

Table 4 summarises results necessary to perform a chi-squared test. This includes the Likelihood
Ratio (LR) and other statistical measures. The null and the alternative hypothesis considered in
this section again prove that there is a difference in the mean assessment results of the two teaching
methods. The null hypothesis is rejected allowing for the test to be treated significant. The assessment
data were collected and the p value obtained, to give 0.0002. This too means that the test is
significant, therefore, it can be stated that at 5% level of significance there is enough evidence to
reject the null hypothesis meaning that there is a difference in mean assessment of the two teaching
methods for the same cohort.

Considering the effect size once more for the data collected within the same cohort, it is found that
the effect size is 0.59, allowing for a large effect size under the Cohen’s effect size guidelines [[31]].
Hence approximately 73% of the mean of the traditional teaching group fall above the mean of the
online group.

8
 Sofroniou and Premnath; JESBS, 35(8): 1-14, 2022; Article no.JESBS.89022

Fig. 3. Box plot of the assessment results for online teaching and Traditional teaching for the
same cohort Academic Year 2020/20121

Table 4. Results of chi-squared test for the same cohort

(b) Categorical Analysis using binary values

Similar Categorical Analysis can be performed for this section as well. Considering the group where
online teaching and face-to-face teaching delivery was conducted to the same cohort of students,
an analysis was implemented on whether student performance improved in the face-to-face learning
environment comparative to the group that was already experiencing online teaching in Academic
Year 2020/2021. The students were given an assessment to fulfill after their learning was delivered
on the same topic. All the obtained data were utilised for a categorical analysis. Considering binary
values, the results from the face-to-face teaching group was assigned the value ’1’ and the online
group was assigned the value ’0’. A binary logistic model was fitted to the data and the output
examined. The values represented by the coefficients of the dependent variables, as seen in Table 5,
give an interpretation about any improvements on student performance relative to the two teaching
methods. This model under consideration, clearly shows a negative impact on online teaching relative
to the face-to-face teaching, with an improved index of 0.592 when taught by the lecturer in the
traditional manner. The negative value, -1.441, suggests that keeping other factors constant, an
increase in one unit of ”online teaching” actually gives a reduction in improvement by 35.7% (exp(-
0.441) = 0.643).

The variable ”face-to-face teaching” suggests that a rise by one unit, improves the student performance
by 80.7% (exp(0.592) = 1.807) whilst keeping other factors fixed. This outcome exemplifies that face-
to-face teaching has a positive effect on the student experience in relation to online teaching.

9
 Sofroniou and Premnath; JESBS, 35(8): 1-14, 2022; Article no.JESBS.89022

Table 5. Categorical analysis for the same cohort

Qualitative Analysis: Survey Results Analysis endured by themselves whilst teaching online,
for the same cohort in Academic Year with bad internet connection during live online
2020/2021 sessions dominating the encountered problems.
Questionnaires were adopted and were given to The lecturer realised that from the side of
the students as well as to the lecturer who taught the students, there was certainly a lack of
the module in the Academic Year 2020/2021. engagement and interaction with the educator
The lecturer was given a questionnaire in order and amongst peers. On the contrary however,
to better understand the mind set of their online online teaching was beneficial for the students
teaching. In actual fact, at the start of the as the recording of lectures gave them the
pandemic, the academic had to adapt very opportunity to watch these sessions many times,
quickly to the new technological changes and so as to gain a better understanding of the topic
to encompass them in their line of teaching. It taught. Moreover, the questionnaire completed
was a challenging time for academics and the by the lecturer allowed for a personal viewpoint
responses of the questionnaire help to envisage to be transferred, that being that online teaching
the struggles faced and how they were overcome. would most probably continue to be used in the
The educator also had to adapt to the new higher educational sector, as part of a blended
environment at home which had an impact on learning approach.
their own family. The time span was very small
for the lecturer to come in terms with the new
software and applications to conduct classes. Students’ questionnaire was different it was a
The educator also felt the drawback of not search of the explanatory viewpoint of how online
seeing the students face-to-face at campus while learning impacted their learning experience. An
teaching through the online method, noting a lack insight into the learning hardships faced by
of engagement from students with their lecturer the students during the pandemic and which
and peers. teaching method was preferred by the student
was identified. The two figures below, Fig. 4
The response of the lecturer’s questionnaire and Fig. 5, diagrammatically portray a few of the
gave a fruitful insight as to the main drawbacks responses from this student questionnaire.

10
 Sofroniou and Premnath; JESBS, 35(8): 1-14, 2022; Article no.JESBS.89022

Fig. 4. Online teaching vs face-to-face teaching

Fig. 5. Preferences of students

In essence, students disagree that online being that students had unlimited, anytime
teaching replaced successfully face-to-face access to useful resources such as live or pre-
teaching, a result that was perhaps anticipated. recordings of lectures. Learning was conducted
in a more flexible manner which was considered
to be more convenient to students as they could
listen to lectures and use teaching material at
4 CONCLUSIONS their own preferred time and pace. However,
although the learning platforms were a good yet
This paper set out to investigate the effectiveness
challenging mode to teach, the Academic Year
of student performance for online teaching
2020/2021 group that undertook online learning
comparative to the traditional face-to-face
achieved inferior results in the assessments,
teaching for a module called ”Analytical
specifically a reduction in student performance by
Mathematics” during Covid-19 pandemic.
35.7%, compared to the group of the same cohort
that underwent face-to-face delivery, which
Many challenges were encountered in teaching
showed an improvement in student performance
during the COVID-19 pandemic. As the move to
by 80.7%. The immense efforts of the lecturer
online learning was unanticipated, both lecturers
to engage and interact with students as well
and students faced difficulties in adjusting to the
as students with their peers also surfaced as a
online teaching experience requiring access to
drawback to online learning. Looking through the
different learning resources through a digital
eyes of the students, 54% agree that they prefer
medium. The qualitative analysis of this paper
the experience of face-to-face teaching rather
identified and concurred with existing literature
than online learning and the majority would not
the advantages of online learning, one of which

11
 Sofroniou and Premnath; JESBS, 35(8): 1-14, 2022; Article no.JESBS.89022

recommend this new online intervention to be traditional face-to-face delivery method for a
used in academia in the future. STEM related subject.

To strengthen this inference, a comparison of test The conclusive remarks presented in this paper
results between the two academic year cohorts support the negative influence of online learning
tackling the different methods of learning was for students’ performance compared to the
conducted with statistical outcomes supporting traditional face-to-face learning technique. The
and exemplifying that face-to-face learning chosen qualitative and quantitative methods
students did perform more successfully. The embrace the effectiveness of face-to-face
results in this paper from the performance ratio, teaching compared to online learning for this
t-test, hypothesis testing, effect size, chi-squared mathematical module ”Analytical Mathematics”.
test and categorical variable analysis all confirm
the reliability of the study since the results 4.1 Suggestions for Future
are consistent and the numerical accuracy of
the test measures show cast their significance Research
and validity. Notably the Academic Year Future research could consider the following
2020/2021 that experienced online delivery due conditions for the online learning experience of
to the pandemic on the chapter ”Simultaneous students:
Equations” performed 56.3% better relative
to the rest of the questions in the exam, • External factor such as students’
whereas the Academic Year 2019/2020 cohort socioeconomic background; understanding
which endured only traditional face-to-face how to support students of a lower
teaching performed at a higher standard with socioeconomic background in their
an analogous percentage of 76.4% . Even if engagement of online learning.
resources of the content material was provided Implementing policies within universities
to students online through pre-recordings, links, would warrant discussions on providing a
online discussion forums, students still performed good learning experience to all students
better with face-to-face learning for this STEM such as perhaps a laptop to students from
related subject. lower socioeconomic backgrounds.
• Further analysis for other mathematics
Current literature has been in favour of online modules or STEM related subjects
learning concluding its existence as effective in order to see if these differences
in the absence of face-to-face teaching. With in students’ learning experience and
the advances in technology, lecturers are able performance is consistent.
to provide good quality teaching to students,
mirroring the outcomes of the traditional face- • It would be informative to investigate the
to-face method. In order to conduct however impact of online learning amongst a larger
effective teaching, educators and students cohort and even more so not during a
should have the latest form of technology. Even health crisis. It is fair to note that this
with the cited advantages for this alternative research study looked at the effects of
learning approach of online delivery, the question online learning during Covid-19 pandemic
at hand is whether the success of online learning therefore, it is these immediate effects of
is coherent for all subjects. In other words, the transition to online learning that were
how effective is online delivery for subjects considered and examined comparative to
in the Science, Technology, Engineering and face-to-face delivery.
Mathematics (STEM) sector? It is this research • As online teaching also requires good
question that lead to the formation of the objective expertise in technology use, that is in
of this paper and to investigate whether during organising and delivering content online,
the pandemic, when online teaching was adopted it may be important to consider providing
as a necessity, improved students’ learning training for students and educators with
experience and performance compared to the using this type of advanced technology.

12
 Sofroniou and Premnath; JESBS, 35(8): 1-14, 2022; Article no.JESBS.89022

Consequently, it can be regarded as useful of Educational Technology Systems,

to investigate whether the impact of online 2020;49(1):5-22.
learning can be enhanced by training [7] Watermeyer, R., Crick, T., Knight, C.
provided to all those involved in the higher and Goodall, J. COVID-19 and digital
education sector. disruption in UK universities: Afflictions and
affordances of emergency online migration.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Higher Education, 2021; 81:623-641.

The authors would like to thank student, [8] Singh S. Reflecting on Higher Education
Ms.Neroshi Nagularaj who assisted with the Examinations. In The University of the
conducting of the investigation. Future: Responding to COVID-19; ACPUL:
Reading, UK, 2020; 161.
[9] Wader, S.S. E-Learning versus classroom
COMPETING INTERESTS training. E-Learning, 2019;6(12).

Authors have declared that no competing [10] Capone R, De Caterina P, Mazza G.

interests exist. Blended learning, flipped classroom and
virtual environment: challenges and
opportunities for the 21st century students.
In Proceedings of Edulearn17 conference.
REFERENCES 2017;10478-10482.
[1] Ozadowicz A. Modified blended learning [11] Cranfield DJ, Tick A, Venter IM, Blignaut
in engineering higher education during the RJ, Renaud K. Higher education students’
COVID-19 lockdown Building automation perceptions of online learning during
courses case study; 2004. COVID-19—A comparative study. Education
Available online at: Sciences, 2021; 11(8):403.
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10100292 [12] Chiodini J. Online learning in the time of
[2] Wagner N, Hassanein K, Head M. Who COVID-19. Travel medicine and infectious
is responsible for e-learning success in disease, 2020; 34:101669.
higher education? A stakeholders’ analysis. [13] Xiong W, Jiang J, Mok KH. Hong Kong
Journal of Educational Technology Society. university students’ online learning
2008;11(3):26-36. experiences under the Covid-19 pandemic.
[3] Adnan M, Anwar K. Online Learning amid Retrieved May, 11, 2020;2020.
the COVID-19 Pandemic: Students’ [14] Irawan AW, Dwisona D, Lestari M.
Perspectives. Online Submission. Psychological impacts of students on online
2020;2(1):45-51. learning during the pandemic COVID-19.
[4] Li C, Lalani F. The COVID-19 pandemic KONSELI: Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling
has changed education forever. In World (E-Journal). 2020;7(1):53-60.
economic forum. The rise of online learning [15] Abah JA. An Appeal in the Case involving
during the COVID-19 pandemic— World Conventional Teaching: Emphasizing the
Economic Forum (weforum. org). 2020; 29. Transformation to Enhanced Conventional
[5] Sofroniou A, Premnath B, Poutos K. Teaching in Mathematics Education.
Capturing student satisfaction: a case VillageMath Educational Review (VER),
study on the National Student Survey 2020;1(1).
results to identify the needs of students [16] Rapanta C, Botturi L, Goodyear P, Guàrdia
in STEM related courses for a better L, Koole M. Online university teaching
learning experience. Education Sciences, during and after the Covid-19 crisis:
2020;10(12):378. Refocusing teacher presence and learning
[6] Dhawan S. Online learning: A panacea activity. Postdigital Science and Education.
in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal 2020; 2(3):923-945.

13
 Sofroniou and Premnath; JESBS, 35(8): 1-14, 2022; Article no.JESBS.89022

[17] Sofroniou A, and Poutos, K. Investigating [25] Regmi K, Jones L. A systematic review of
the effectiveness of group work in the factors–enablers and barriers–affecting
mathematics. Education Sciences 6, e-learning in health sciences education.
2016;3:30. BMC medical education, 2020;20(1):1-18.
[18] Singh A. Traditional learning vs elearning: [26] Singh J, Steele K, Singh L. Combining the
Does the latter prevail? 2019. Accessed on Best of Online and Face-to-Face Learning:
June 9th 2022. Hybrid and Blended Learning Approach for
[19] Alonso F, López G, Manrique D, Viñes JM. COVID-19, Post Vaccine, Post-Pandemic
An instructional model for web-based e- World. Journal of Educational Technology
learning education with a blended learning Systems, 2021; 50(2):140-171.
process approach. British Journal of [27] Moorhouse BL. Adaptations to a face-
educational technology. 2005;36(2):217- to-face initial teacher education course
235. ‘forced’online due to the COVID-19
[20] Holenko M, and Hoić-Božić N. Using pandemic. Journal of Education for
Online Discussions in a Blended Learning Teaching, 2020; 46(4):609-611.
Course. International Journal of Emerging
[28] Ortiz PA. Teaching in the time of COVID-
Technologies in Learning. 2008;3.
19. Biochemistry and molecular biology
[21] Bonwell CC, Eison JA. Active Learning: education; 2020.
Creating Excitement in the Classroom.
[29] Coe, R. It’s the effect size, stupid: What
ERIC Digest; 1991.
effect size is and why it is important. In
[22] King SE, Cerrone Arnold KATIE. Blended Proceedings of the Annual Conference
learning environments in higher education: of the British Educational Research
A case study of how professors make Association, Exeter, UK; 2002.
it happen. Mid-Western Educational
Researcher, 2012; 25. [30] Sofroniou A. Learning and Engagement
in the Flipped Classroom of Analytical
[23] Naidoo, J. Postgraduate mathematics
Mathematics. Journal of Education, Society
education students’ experiences of using
and Behavioural Science, 2020;33(11):93-
digital platforms for learning within the
111.
COVID-19 pandemic era. Pythagoras,
Available: https://doi.org/10.9734/jesbs/2020/
2020;41(1):568.
v33i1130275
[24] Rodriguez, R. How Learning Works: Seven
[31] Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the
Research-Based Principles for Smart
Behavioural Science; Academic Press: New
Teaching [review]/Susan A. Ambrose,
York, NY, USA;1969.
Michael W. Bridges, Marsha C. Lovett,
Michele DiPietro, and Marie K. Norman. [32] Powers, D. and Xie, Y. Statistical methods
Journal of Applied Christian Leadership. for categorical data analysis. Emerald
2011;5(2):106-107. Group Publishing; 2008.

—————————————————————————————————————————————————–
© 2022 Sofroniou and Premnath; This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribu-
tion and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Peer-review history:
The peer review history for this paper can be accessed here:
https://www.sdiarticle5.com/review-history/89022

14