Rapid transition to distance learning due to COVID-19: Perceptions of postgraduate dental learners and instructors

  1. Fatemeh Amir Rad
  2. Farah Otaki
  3. Zaid Baqain
  4. Nabil Zary
  5. Manal Al-Halabi

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

The outbreak of Coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19) necessitated an abrupt transition from on campus, face-to-face sessions to online, distance learning in higher education institutions. The purpose of this study was to investigate the perceptions of postgraduate dental learners and instructors about the transition to distance learning, including the changes to the learning and teaching and its efficaciousness. A convergent mixed methods approach to research was utilized. All the instructors and postgraduate learners in a dental college were invited to participate in an online survey. Quantitative data was analyzed using descriptive and inferential analyses on SPSS for Windows version 25.0, and for the responses to the open-ended questions, multi-staged thematic analysis was utilized. Both groups of stakeholders: learners and instructors, were satisfied with the rapid transition to distance learning due to COVID-19. Instructors were significantly more satisfied than the learners. The stakeholders adapted well to the change. The perception of the stakeholders regarding the case-based scenarios significantly influenced their level of satisfaction. As perceived by the stakeholders, the transition to distance learning entailed advantages and challenges. Going through the experience enabled the stakeholders to develop informed opinions of how best to sustain learning and teaching irrespective of how matters unfold in relation to the pandemic. In conclusion, the worldwide dental education community faced unprecedented challenges due to the onset of COVID-19. From a macro perspective, decision-makers must not miss out on the valuable opportunities, inherent in the experience, to reinforce curriculums, and maximize learning and teaching.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1371/journal.pone.0246584
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.09.19.20197830: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    This study is characterized by a few limitations. In alignment with the principles of the Institutional Research function, complete anonymity of the participants was maintained. Therefore, the gender, age, and the current level in the respective programs of the participants were not recorded. It would have been interesting to know if the satisfaction and the perceived impact of the transition are associated with those demographic variables. Also, the qualitative data offered a lot of insights that could have been further explored with alternative data collection tools (e.g., focus group sessions). Moreover, although the focused study design enabled the development of thorough insights, the generalizability of the findings is limited to institutions that are contextually and characteristically like MBRU. This limitation is further pronounced given the exceptionality of the times of the COVID-19 pandemic (on all fronts). It goes without saying that both groups of stakeholders faced major changes in their personal and social lives. Their day-to-day life was majorly disrupted, and they were all under a lot of pressure due to the halting of the clinical training which, in principle, entails 60% of the postgraduates’ time. This left the stakeholders with more time to study and to engage in other virtual educational activities which might not remain the case after resuming the clinical learning. Therefore, any decision on the changes of the curriculum towards blended learning needs ...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.09.19.20197830v1 on medRxiv