P. Pohlenz, Annika Felix, Sarah Berndt, Markus Seyfried
{"title":"学生如何应对教学中的强制数字化?对质量保证的影响","authors":"P. Pohlenz, Annika Felix, Sarah Berndt, Markus Seyfried","doi":"10.1108/qae-02-2022-0041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper aims to investigate student subgroups’ responses to the coercive digitalisation of teaching and learning processes during the pandemic. Respective variance is discussed in terms of digital inequality and is interpreted as a need to individualise teaching and learning and quality assurance practices.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis study uses data from surveys (N = 955) on student perceptions of the introduction of emergency digitalisation – an important aspect of higher education. The authors perform latent class analyses to identify student subgroups. The students were asked to rate digital learning processes and their overall learning experiences.\n\n\nFindings\nThe identified student subgroups are proponents, pragmatics and sceptics of digitalised teaching and learning processes. These subgroups have different preferences with regard to teaching and learning modes of delivery, which implies the relevance of individualised educational services and respective quality assurance practices to reflections on improvement needs.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThe data are from a single, typical German university; therefore, the scope of the results may be limited. However, this study enriches future research on the traits of student subgroups and students’ coping strategies in an ever-changing learning environment.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThe findings may help individualise universities’ counselling services to enhance overall teaching performance and quality assurance practices in a digitalised environment.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe findings provide insights into students’ responses to the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on teaching and learning. This paper enriches the research on student heterogeneity and relates this to development needs of quality assurance practice.\n","PeriodicalId":46734,"journal":{"name":"QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How do students deal with forced digitalisation in teaching and learning? Implications for quality assurance\",\"authors\":\"P. Pohlenz, Annika Felix, Sarah Berndt, Markus Seyfried\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/qae-02-2022-0041\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThis paper aims to investigate student subgroups’ responses to the coercive digitalisation of teaching and learning processes during the pandemic. Respective variance is discussed in terms of digital inequality and is interpreted as a need to individualise teaching and learning and quality assurance practices.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nThis study uses data from surveys (N = 955) on student perceptions of the introduction of emergency digitalisation – an important aspect of higher education. The authors perform latent class analyses to identify student subgroups. The students were asked to rate digital learning processes and their overall learning experiences.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThe identified student subgroups are proponents, pragmatics and sceptics of digitalised teaching and learning processes. These subgroups have different preferences with regard to teaching and learning modes of delivery, which implies the relevance of individualised educational services and respective quality assurance practices to reflections on improvement needs.\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nThe data are from a single, typical German university; therefore, the scope of the results may be limited. However, this study enriches future research on the traits of student subgroups and students’ coping strategies in an ever-changing learning environment.\\n\\n\\nPractical implications\\nThe findings may help individualise universities’ counselling services to enhance overall teaching performance and quality assurance practices in a digitalised environment.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThe findings provide insights into students’ responses to the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on teaching and learning. This paper enriches the research on student heterogeneity and relates this to development needs of quality assurance practice.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":46734,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/qae-02-2022-0041\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EDUCATION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/qae-02-2022-0041","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
How do students deal with forced digitalisation in teaching and learning? Implications for quality assurance
Purpose
This paper aims to investigate student subgroups’ responses to the coercive digitalisation of teaching and learning processes during the pandemic. Respective variance is discussed in terms of digital inequality and is interpreted as a need to individualise teaching and learning and quality assurance practices.
Design/methodology/approach
This study uses data from surveys (N = 955) on student perceptions of the introduction of emergency digitalisation – an important aspect of higher education. The authors perform latent class analyses to identify student subgroups. The students were asked to rate digital learning processes and their overall learning experiences.
Findings
The identified student subgroups are proponents, pragmatics and sceptics of digitalised teaching and learning processes. These subgroups have different preferences with regard to teaching and learning modes of delivery, which implies the relevance of individualised educational services and respective quality assurance practices to reflections on improvement needs.
Research limitations/implications
The data are from a single, typical German university; therefore, the scope of the results may be limited. However, this study enriches future research on the traits of student subgroups and students’ coping strategies in an ever-changing learning environment.
Practical implications
The findings may help individualise universities’ counselling services to enhance overall teaching performance and quality assurance practices in a digitalised environment.
Originality/value
The findings provide insights into students’ responses to the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on teaching and learning. This paper enriches the research on student heterogeneity and relates this to development needs of quality assurance practice.
期刊介绍:
QAE publishes original empirical or theoretical articles on Quality Assurance issues, including dimensions and indicators of Quality and Quality Improvement, as applicable to education at all levels, including pre-primary, primary, secondary, higher and professional education. Periodically, QAE also publishes systematic reviews, research syntheses and assessment policy articles on topics of current significance. As an international journal, QAE seeks submissions on topics that have global relevance. Article submissions could pertain to the following areas integral to QAE''s mission: -organizational or program development, change and improvement -educational testing or assessment programs -evaluation of educational innovations, programs and projects -school efficiency assessments -standards, reforms, accountability, accreditation, and audits in education -tools, criteria and methods for examining or assuring quality