case study on online teaching

Effective Teaching Through Online Discussion—Enhancing Pedagogy and Practice

• First Online: 02 September 2024

Cite this chapter

• Dianne Forbes   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6557-5305 4 ,
• Nicola Daly 4 &
• Liang Li 5  

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Education ((BRIEFSODE))

This chapter looks at how teachers can convene and moderate online discussions in ways that are effective for student learning and engagement; time-efficient; varied and satisfying. The chapter tackles basic organizational factors such as grouping, topics, links to class, and assignments, purpose/s, and how to guide students. A key point of reference is acknowledgement of common concerns for teachers as we strive to keep the online discussions interesting and varied, to engage student participation and promote learning. The chapter provides guidance on how to establish a purpose for discussion, maintain appropriate presence, intervene to enhance learning, and manage time and self effectively to keep workload under control.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Barkley, E. F., Major, C. H., & Cross, K. P. (2014). Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty (2nd ed. ). Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Google Scholar  

Bender, T. (2012). Discussion-Based Online Teaching to Enhance Student Learning : Theory, Practice and Assessment . Stylus Publishing, LLC. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/waikato/detail.action?docID=987038

Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Cognitive and affective domains . David McKay.

Boettcher, J. V., & Conrad, R-M. (2021). The Online Teaching Survival Guide: Simple and Practical Pedagogical Tips . Wiley.

Bright, S. (2015). ELearning lecturer workload: Working harder or working smarter? In N. Wright & D. Forbes (Eds.), Digital smarts: Enhancing learning and teaching (pp. 161–178). Wilf Malcolm Institute of Educational Research.

Brookfield, S. D., & Preskill, S. (2005). Discussion as a way of teaching: Tools and techniques for democratic classrooms . Jossey-Bass.

Chen, L.-T., & Liu, L. (2020). Social presence in multidimensional online discussion: the roles of group size and requirements for discussions. Computers in the Schools, 37 (2), 116–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2020.1756648

Article   Google Scholar  

Clarke, L. W., & Bartholomew, A. (2014). Digging beneath the surface: Analyzing the complexity of instructors’ participation in asynchronous discussion [Report]. Online Learning Journal (OLJ) , 18 , 105+. https://link-gale-com.ezproxy.waikato.ac.nz/apps/doc/A443459164/AONE?u=waikato&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=b4c0bd09

Earl, K. (2015). Assessment digital smarts: Using short text assignment formats for enhancing student learning. In N. Wright & D. Forbes (Eds.), Digital smarts: Enhancing learning and teaching (pp. 66–81). Wilf Malcolm Institute of Educational Research.

Fear, W. J., & Erikson-Brown, A. (2014). Good quality discussion is necessary but not sufficient in asynchronous tuition: A brief narrative review of the literature. Journal of asynchronous learning networks JALN , 18 (2), 21. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v18i2.399

Forbes, D. (2012). Footprints participant perspectives informing pedagogy for asynchronous online discussion in initial teacher education . Thesis (Ph.D. Education)--University of Waikato, 2013.

Hambacher, E., Ginn, K., & Slater, K. (2018). Letting students lead: Preservice teachers’ experiences of learning in online discussions. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 34 (3), 151–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2018.1453893

Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2012). Student Participation in Online Discussions: Challenges, Solutions, and Future Research (1. Aufl. ed.). Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2370-6

Hew, K. F. (2015). Student perceptions of peer versus instructor facilitation of asynchronous online discussions: Further findings from three cases. Instructional Science, 43 (1), 19–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-014-9329-2

Hoey, R. (2017). Examining the characteristics and content of instructor discussion interaction upon student outcomes in an online course. Online learning (Newburyport, Mass.) , 21 (4), 263–281. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i4.1075

Howell, G. S., LaCour, M. M., & McGlawn, P. A. (2017). Constructing student knowledge in the online classroom: The effectiveness of focal prompts. College Student Journal, 51 (4), 483–490.

Kilis, S., & Yildirim, Z. (2019). Posting patterns of students’ social presence, cognitive presence, and teaching presence in online learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks JALN, 23 (2), 179.

Kim, J. (2013). Influence of group size on students’ participation in online discussion forums. Computers and Education, 62 , 123–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.025

Kwon, K., Park, S. J., Shin, S., & Chang, C. Y. (2019). Effects of different types of instructor comments in online discussions. Distance Education, 40 (2), 226–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2019.1602469

McDonald, J. P. (2012). Going online with protocols: New tools for teaching and learning . Teachers College Press.

Murphy, C. A., & Fortner, R. A. (2014). Impact of instructor intervention on the quality and frequency of student discussion posts in a blended classroom. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10 (3), 337.

Nandi, D., Hamilton, M., & Harland, J. (2012). Evaluating the quality of interaction in asynchronous discussion forums in fully online courses. Distance Education, 33 (1), 5–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2012.667957

Oh, E. G., Huang, W-H. D., Hedayati Mehdiabadi, A., & Ju, B. (2018). Facilitating critical thinking in asynchronous online discussion: comparison between peer-and instructor-redirection. Journal of computing in higher education , 30 (3), 489-509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-018-9180-6

Phirangee, K., Epp, C. D., & Hewitt, J. (2016). Exploring the relationships between facilitation methods, students’ sense of community, and their online behaviors. Online Learning, 20 (2), 134–154.

Qiu, M., & McDougall, D. (2015). Influence of group configuration on online discourse reading. Computers and Education, 87 , 151–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.04.006

Richardson, J. C., & Ice, P. (2010). Investigating students’ level of critical thinking across instructional strategies in online discussions. The Internet and Higher Education , 13 (1), 52–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.009

Salmon, G. (2011). E-moderating: the key to teaching and learning online (Third edition. ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203816684

Stavredes, T. (2011). Effective online teaching foundations and strategies for student success . Wiley.

Tomei, L. A. (2006). The impact of online teaching on faculty load: Computing the ideal class size for online courses. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14 (3), 531.

Westberry, N., & Franken, M. (2013). Co-construction of knowledge in tertiary online settings: An ecology of resources perspective. Instructional Science, 41 (1), 147–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-012-9222-9

Yang, T., Luo, H., & Sun, D. (2022). Investigating the combined effects of group size and group composition in online discussion. Active Learning in Higher Education, 23 (2), 115–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787420938524

York, C. S., & Richardson, J. C. (2012). Interpersonal interaction in online learning: Experienced online instructors’ perceptions of influencing factors. Journal of asynchronous learning networks JALN , 16 (4), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v16i4.229

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Division of Education, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

Dianne Forbes & Nicola Daly

School of Arts and Education, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dianne Forbes .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Forbes, D., Daly, N., Li, L. (2024). Effective Teaching Through Online Discussion—Enhancing Pedagogy and Practice. In: Designing Discussion for Online and Blended Courses. SpringerBriefs in Education(). Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-6196-8_4

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-6196-8_4

Published : 02 September 2024

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-97-6195-1

Online ISBN : 978-981-97-6196-8

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Online education and its effect on teachers during COVID-19—A case study from India

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation Area of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Management Indore, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India

• Surbhi Dayal

• Published: March 2, 2023
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282287
• Reader Comments

COVID pandemic resulted in an initially temporary and then long term closure of educational institutions, creating a need for adapting to online and remote learning. The transition to online education platforms presented unprecedented challenges for the teachers. The aim of this research was to investigate the effects of the transition to online education on teachers’ wellbeing in India.

The research was conducted on 1812 teachers working in schools, colleges, and coaching institutions from six different Indian states. Quantitative and qualitative data was collected via online survey and telephone interviews.

The results show that COVID pandemic exacerbated the existing widespread inequality in access to internet connectivity, smart devices, and teacher training required for an effective transition to an online mode of education. Teachers nonetheless adapted quickly to online teaching with the help of institutional training as well as self-learning tools. However, respondents expressed dissatisfaction with the effectiveness of online teaching and assessment methods, and exhibited a strong desire to return to traditional modes of learning. 82% respondents reported physical issues like neck pain, back pain, headache, and eyestrain. Additionally, 92% respondents faced mental issues like stress, anxiety, and loneliness due to online teaching.

As the effectiveness of online learning perforce taps on the existing infrastructure, not only has it widened the learning gap between the rich and the poor, it has also compromised the quality of education being imparted in general. Teachers faced increased physical and mental health issues due to long working hours and uncertainty associated with COVID lockdowns. There is a need to develop a sound strategy to address the gaps in access to digital learning and teachers’ training to improve both the quality of education and the mental health of teachers.

Citation: Dayal S (2023) Online education and its effect on teachers during COVID-19—A case study from India. PLoS ONE 18(3): e0282287. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282287

Editor: Lütfullah Türkmen, Usak University College of Education, TURKEY

Received: November 13, 2021; Accepted: January 27, 2023; Published: March 2, 2023

Copyright: © 2023 Surbhi Dayal. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: Data apart from manuscript has been submitted as supporting information .

Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

As of November 4, 2021, the spread of novel coronavirus had reached 219 countries and territories of the world, infecting a total of 248 million people and resulting in five million deaths [ 1 ]. In March 2020, several countries including India declared a mandatory lockdown, resulting in the temporary closure of many institutions, not least educational ones. Since then, various restrictions and strategies have been implemented to counter the spread of the virus. These include wearing masks, washing hands frequently, maintaining social and physical distance, and avoiding public gatherings. The pandemic has greatly disrupted all aspects of human life and forced new ways of functioning, notably in work and education, much of which has been restricted to the household environment. The closure for over a year of many schools and colleges across the world has shaken the foundations of the traditional structures of education. Due to widespread restrictions, employees have been forced to carve out working spaces in the family home; likewise, students and teachers have been compelled to bring classes into homes [ 2 ]. Nearly 1.6 billion learners in more than 190 countries have been physically out of school due to the pandemic. In total, 94 percent of the world’s student population has been affected by school closures, and up to 99 percent of this student population come from low-to middle-income countries [ 3 ].

According to the World Economic Forum, the pandemic has changed how people receive and impart education [ 4 ]. Physical interaction between students and teachers in traditional classrooms has been replaced by exchanges on digital learning platforms, such as online teaching and virtual education systems, characterized by an absence of face-to-face connection [ 5 ]. Online education has thus emerged as a viable option for education from preschool to university level, and governments have used tools such as radio, television, and social media to support online teaching and training [ 6 ]. Various stakeholders, including government and private institutions, have collaborated to provide teachers with resources and training to teach effectively on digital platforms. New digital learning platforms like Zoom, Google Classroom, Canvas, and Blackboard have been used extensively to create learning material and deliver online classes; they have also allowed teachers to devise training and skill development programs [ 7 ]. Many teachers and students were initially hesitant to adopt online education. However indefinite closure of institutions required educational facilities to find new methods to impart education and forced teachers to learn new digital skills. Individuals have experienced different levels of difficulty in doing this; for some, “it has resulted in tears, and for some, it is a cup of tea” [ 8 ].

Teachers have reported finding it difficult to use online teaching as a daily mode of communication, and enabling students’ cognitive activation has presented a significant challenge in the use of distance modes of teaching and learning. Teachers have also expressed concerns about administering tests with minimal student interaction [ 9 ]. Lack of availability of smart devices, combined with unreliable internet access, has led to dissatisfaction with teacher-student interaction. Under pressure to select the appropriate tools and media to reach their students, some teachers have relied on pre-recorded videos, which further discouraged interaction. In locations where most teaching is done online, teachers in tier 2 and tier 3 cities (i.e., semi-urban areas) have had to pay extra to secure access to high-speed internet, digital devices, and reliable power sources [ 10 ]. Teachers in India, in particular, have a huge gap in digital literacy caused by a lack of training and access to reliable electricity supply, and internet services. In rural or remote areas, access to smart devices, the internet, and technology is limited and inconsistent [ 6 ]. In cities, including the Indian capital Delhi, even teachers who are familiar with the required technology do not necessarily have the pedagogical skills to meet the demands of online education. The absence of training, along with local factors (for example, stakeholders’ infrastructure and socio-economic standing), contributes to difficulties in imparting digital education successfully [ 10 ]. The gap in digital education across Indian schools is striking. For example, only 32.5% of school children are in a position to pursue online classes. Only 11% of children can take online classes in private and public schools, and more than half can only view videos or other recorded content. Only 8.1% of children in government schools have access to online classes in the event of a pandemic-related restrictions [ 11 ].

The adverse effects of COVID-19 on education must therefore be investigated and understood, particularly the struggles of students and teachers to adapt to new technologies. Significant societal effects of the pandemic include not only serious disruption of education but also isolation caused by social distancing. Various studies [ 7 , 12 , 13 ] have suggested that online education has caused significant stress and health problems for students and teachers alike; health issues have also been exacerbated by the extensive use of digital devices. Several studies [ 6 , 11 , 14 ] have been conducted to understand the effects of the COVID lockdown on digital access to education, students’ physical and emotional well-being, and the effectiveness of online education. However, only a few studies [ 13 , 15 – 17 ] have touched the issues that teachers faced due to COVID lockdown.

In this context, this study is trying to fill existing gaps and focuses on the upheavals that teachers went through to accommodate COVID restrictions and still impart education. It also provides an in-depth analysis of consequences for the quality of education imparted from the teachers’ perspective. It discusses geographical inequalities in access to the infrastructure required for successful implementation of online education. In particular, it addresses the following important questions: (1) how effectively have teachers adapted to the new virtual system? (2) How has online education affected the quality of teaching? (3) How has online education affected teachers’ overall health?

Because of lockdown restrictions, data collection for this study involved a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods in the form of online surveys and telephonic interviews. A questionnaire for teachers was developed consisting of 41 items covering a variety of subjects: teaching styles, life-work balance, and how working online influences the mental and physical well-being of teachers. In the interviews, participants were asked about their experiences of online teaching during the pandemic, particularly in relation to physical and mental health issues. A pilot study was conducted with thirty respondents, and necessary changes to the items were made before the data collection. The survey tool was created using google forms and disseminated via email, Facebook, and WhatsApp. A total of 145 telephonic interviews were also conducted to obtain in-depth information from the respondents.

The data were collected between December 2020 and June 2021. The Research Advisory Committee on Codes of Ethics for Research of Aggrawal College, Ballabhgarh, Haryana, reviewed and approved this study. A statement included in the google survey form as a means of acquiring written consent from the participants. Information was gathered from 1,812 Indian teachers in six Indian states (Assam, Haryana, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, New Delhi, and Rajasthan) working in universities, schools, and coaching institutions. Nearly three-quarters of the total sample population was women. All participants were between the ages of 18 and 60, with an average age of 34 and a clear majority being 35 or younger. Nearly three-quarters of participants work in private institutions (25% in semi-government entities and the remainder in government entities). In terms of education, 52% of participants have a graduate degree, 34% a postgraduate degree, and 14% a doctorate. Table 1 summarizes the demographic characteristics of the participants.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282287.t001

Results & discussion

Upon analyzing the survey responses, three crucial areas were identified for a better understanding of the effect of COVID-19 on the Indian education system and its teachers: how effectively teachers have adapted, how effective teaching has been, and how teachers’ health has been affected.

1. How effectively have teachers adapted to the new virtual system?

The first research question concerns how willing teachers were to embrace the changes brought about by the online teaching system and how quickly they were able to adapt to online modes of instruction. This information was gathered from December 2020 to June 2021, at which point teachers had been dealing with school lockdowns for months and therefore had some time to become conversant with online teaching.

While 93.82% of respondents were involved in online teaching during the pandemic, only 16% had previously taught online. These results were typically different from the results of a similar study conducted in Jordon where most of the faculty (60%) had previous experience with online teaching and 68% of faculty had also received formal training [ 16 ]. Since the spread of COVID-19 was rapid and the implementation of the lockdown was sudden, government and educational institutions were not prepared for alternative modes of learning, and teachers needed some time for adjustment. Several other factors also affected the effectiveness of the transition to online education, namely access to different types of resources and training [ 18 ].

a. Access to smart devices.

Online teaching requires access to smart devices. A surprising number of teachers stated that they had internet access at home via laptops, smartphones, or tablets. A more pertinent question, however, was whether they had sole access to the smart device, or it was shared with family members. Only 37.25% of those surveyed had a device for their exclusive use while others shared a device with family members, due to lack of access to additional devices and affordability of new devices. During the lockdown, an increase in demand led to a scarcity of smart devices, so that even people who could afford to buy a device could not necessarily find one available for purchase. With children attending online classes, and family members working from home, households found it difficult to manage with only a few devices, and access to a personal digital device became an urgent matter for many. Respondents admitted to relying on their smartphones to teach courses since they lacked access to other devices. Teachers on independent-school rosters were significantly better equipped to access smart devices than those employed at other types of schools. The data also indicates that teachers in higher education and at coaching centers had relatively better access to laptops and desktop computers through their institutions, whereas teachers in elementary and secondary schools had to scramble for securing devices for their own use.

b. Internet access.

Internet access is crucial for effective delivery of online education. However, our survey shows that teachers often struggled to stay connected because of substantial differences between states in the availability of internet. Of the respondents, 52% reported that their internet was stable and reliable, 32% reported it to be satisfactory and the rest reported it to be poor. Internet connectivity was better in the states of Karnataka, New Delhi, and Rajasthan than in Assam, Haryana, and Madhya Pradesh. Internet connectivity in Assam was particularly poor. Consequently, many teachers with access to advanced devices were unable to use them due to inadequate internet connection.

The following comments from a teacher in Assam capture relevant situational challenges: “I do not have an internet modem at home, and teaching over the phone is difficult. My internet connection is exhausted, and I am unable to see or hear the students.” Another teacher from Haryana reported similar difficulties: “During the lockdown, I moved to my hometown, and I do not have internet access here, so I go to a nearby village and send videos to students every three days.” Another teacher from Madhya Pradesh working at a premier institution reported experiencing somewhat different concerns: “I am teaching in one of the institute’s semi-smart classrooms, and while I have access to the internet, my students do not, making it difficult to hear what they are saying.”

These responses indicates clearly that it is not only teachers living in states where connectivity was poor who experienced difficulties in imparting education to students; even those who had good internet connectivity experiences problems caused by the poor internet connections of their students.

c. Tools for remote learning.

Teachers made use of a variety of remote learning tools, but access to these tools varied depending on the educator’s affiliation. Teachers at premier institutions and coaching centers routinely used the Zoom and Google Meet apps to conduct synchronous lessons. Teachers at state colleges used pre-recorded videos that were freely available on YouTube. Teachers in government schools used various platforms, including WhatsApp for prepared material and YouTube for pre-recorded videos. To deliver the content, private school teachers used pre-recorded lectures and Google Meet. In addition to curriculum classes, school teachers offered life skill classes (for example, cooking, gardening, and organizing) to help students become more independent and responsible in these difficult circumstances. In addition to online instruction, 16% of teachers visited their students’ homes to distribute books and other materials. Furthermore, of this 36% visited students’ homes once a week, 29% visited twice a week, 18% once every two weeks, and the rest once a month. Additionally, a survey done on 6435 respondents across six states in India reported that 21% teachers in schools conducted home visits for teaching children [ 19 ].

d. Knowledge and training for the use of information and communication technologies.

With the onset of the pandemic, information and communication technology (ICT) became a pivotal point for the viability of online education. The use of ICT can facilitate curriculum coverage, application of pedagogical practices and assessment, teacher’s professional development, and streamlining school organization [ 20 ]. However, the effective adoption and implementation of ICT necessitated delivery of appropriate training and prolonged practice. Also the manner in which teachers use ICT is crucial to successful implementation of online education [ 21 ]. While countries such as Germany, Japan, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States recognized the importance of ICT by integrating it into their respective teacher training programmes [ 22 ], this has not been case in India. However, there are some training programmes available to teachers once they commence working. In accordance with our survey results, the vast majority of respondents (94%) lacked any ICT training or experience. In the absence of appropriate tools and support, these teachers self-experimented with online platforms, with equal chances of success and failure.

The transition from offline to online or remote learning was abrupt, and teachers had to adapt quickly to the new systems. Our data indicate that teachers in professional colleges and coaching centers received some training to help them adapt to the new online system, whereas teachers in urban areas primarily learned on their own from YouTube videos, and school teachers in rural areas received no support at all. Overall, teachers had insufficient training and support to adjust to this completely new situation. Policy research conducted on online and remote learning systems following COVID-19 has found similar results, namely that teachers implemented distance learning modalities from the start of the pandemic, often without adequate guidance, training, or resources [ 23 ]. Similar trends have been found in the Caribbean, where the unavailability of smart learning devices, lack of or poor internet access, and lack of prior training for teachers and students hampered online learning greatly. Furthermore, in many cases the curriculum was not designed for online teaching, which was a key concern for teachers [ 24 ]. Preparing online lectures as well as monitoring, supervising and providing remote support to students also led to stress and anxiety. Self-imposed perfectionism further exacerbated these issues while delivering online education [ 15 ]. A study conducted on 288 teachers from private and government schools in Delhi and National Capital Region area, also found that transition to online education has further widened the gap between pupils from government and private schools. It was more difficult to reach students from economically weaker sections of the society due to the digital divide in terms of access, usage, and skills gap. The study also found that even when teachers were digitally savvy, it did not mean that they know how to prepare for and take online classes [ 10 ].

2. How has online education affected the quality of teaching?

Once teachers had acquired some familiarity with the online system, new questions arose concerning how online education affected the quality of teaching in terms of learning and assessment, and how satisfied teachers were with this new mode of imparting education. To address these questions, specific questionnaire items about assessment and effectiveness of teaching has been included.

a. Effectiveness of online education.

Respondents agreed unanimously that online education impeded student-teacher bonding. They reported several concerns, including the inattentiveness of the majority of the students in the class, the physical absence of students (who at times logged in but then went elsewhere), the inability to engage students online, and the difficulty of carrying out any productive discussion given that only a few students were participating. Another significant concern was the difficulty in administrating online tests in light of widespread cheating. In the words of one teacher: “I was teaching a new class of students with whom I had never interacted in person. It was not easy because I could not remember the names of the students or relate to them. Students were irritated when I called out their names. It had a significant impact on my feedback. I would like us to return to class so I do not have to manage four screens and can focus on my students and on solving their problems.”

For these reasons, 85.65% of respondents stated that the quality of education had been significantly compromised in the online mode. As a result, only 33% reported being interested in continuing with online teaching after COVID-19. The results show slightly higher dissatisfaction in comparison to another study conducted in India that reported 67% of teachers feeling dissatisfied with online teaching [ 25 ]. Findings of this study were similar to the findings of a survey of lecturers in Ukraine assessing the effectiveness of online education. Lower quality student work was cited as the third most mentioned problem among the problems cited by instructors in their experience with online teaching, right behind unreliable internet connectivity and the issues related with software and hardware. Primary reasons for lower quality student work were drop in the number of assignments and work quality as well as cheating. Almost half (48.7%) of the participants expressed their disapproval of online work and would not like to teach online [ 26 ].

Due to the nature of the online mode, teachers were also unable to use creative methods to teach students. Some were accustomed to using physical objects and role-playing to engage students in the classroom, but they found it extremely difficult to make learning exciting and to engage their students in virtual space. Similar trends have been reported in Australia, where schoolteachers in outback areas did not find online education helpful or practical for children, a majority of whom came from low-income families. The teachers were used to employing innovative methods to keep the students engaged in the classroom. However, in online teaching, they could not connect with their students using those methods, which significantly hampered their students’ progress. Some teachers mentioned difficulties with online teaching caused by not being able to use physical and concrete objects to improve their instructions [ 27 ].

b. Online evaluation.

Of our respondents, 81% said that they had conducted online assessments of their students. Teachers used various online assessment methods, including proctored closed/open book exams and quizzes, assignment submissions, class exercises, and presentations. Teachers who chose not to administer online assessments graded their students’ performance based on participation in class and previous results.

Almost two-thirds of teachers who had administered online assessments were dissatisfied with the effectiveness and transparency of those assessments, given the high rates of cheating and internet connectivity issues. They also reported that family members had been helping students to cheat in exams because they wanted their children to get higher grades by any means necessary. In response, the teachers had tried to devise methods to discourage students and their families from cheating, but they still felt powerless to prevent widespread cheating.

As one respondent stated: “We are taking many precautions to stop cheating, such as asking to install a mirror behind the student and doing online proctoring, but students have their ways out for every matter. They disconnect the internet cable or turn it off and reconnect it later. When we question them, they have a connectivity reason ready”.

Teachers are also concerned about the effects of the digital skills gap on their creation of worksheets, assessments, and other teaching materials. As a result, some private companies have been putting together teacher training programs. The main challenge pertains to be implementation of a type of specialized education that many teachers are unfamiliar with and unwilling to adopt [ 28 ]. Because of the lack of effective and transparent online assessments, school teachers have reported that students were promoted to the next level regardless of their performance. Thus, only time will tell how successful online education has been in terms of its effects on the lives of learners.

3. How has online education affected teacher’s overall health?

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic brought about a situation that few people had experienced or even imagined living through. Governments and individuals tried their best to adjust to the new circumstances, but sudden lockdown, confinement to the household periphery, and working from home had adverse effects on the mental and physical health of many people, including educators and students. To clarify the effects of online education on teachers’ overall health, a number of questionnaire items were focused on respondents’ feelings during the lockdown, the physical and mental health issues they experienced, and their concerns about the future given the uncertainty of the present situation.

a. Physical health issues.

COVID-19 brought a multitude of changes to the lives of educators. Confinement to the household, working from home, and an increased burden of household and caregiving tasks due to the absence of paid domestic assistants increased physical workload and had corresponding adverse effects on the physical health of educators.

Of the study participants, 82% reported an increase in physical health issues since the lockdown ( Fig 1 ). Notably, 47% of those who were involved in digital mode of learning for less than 3 hours per day reported experiencing some physical discomfort daily, rising to 51% of teachers who worked online for 4–6 hours per day and 55% of teachers who worked more than 6 hours per day. Respondents reported a variety of physical health issues, including headaches, eye strain, back pain, and neck pain.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282287.g001

The number of hours worked showed a positive correlation with the physical discomfort or health issues experienced. A chi-square test was applied to determine the relationship between the number of online working hours and the frequency of physical issues experienced by the participants and found it to be significant at the 0.05 level ( Table 2 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282287.t002

As Fig 2 shows, 28% respondents’ complaint about experiencing giddiness, headaches; 59% complain of having neck and back pain. The majority of the participants had eye-strain problems most of the time; 32% faced eye problems sometimes, and 18% reported never having any eye issue. In addition, 49% had experienced two issues at the same time and 20% reported experiencing more than 2 physical issues at the same time.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282287.g002

The data in this study indicates a link between bodily distresses and hours worked. As working hours increased, so did reports of back and neck pain. 47% respondents reported back and neck pain after working for 3 hours or less, 60% after working for 3–6 hours, and nearly 70% after working for 6 hours or more.

The analysis also indicates link between physical issues experienced and the educator’s gender. Women experienced more physical discomfort than men, with 51% reporting frequent discomfort, compared to only 46% of men. Only 14% of female educators reported never experiencing physical discomfort, against 30% of male educators.

In terms of types of discomfort, 76% of female teachers and 51% of male teachers reported eye strain; 62% of female teacher and 43% of male teachers reported back and neck pain; 30% of female teachers and 18% of male teachers said they had experienced dizziness and headaches. The gender differences may be caused by the increase in household and childcare responsibilities falling disproportionately on female educators compared to their male counterparts. Several studies [ 17 , 29 – 31 ] have reported similar results, indicating that the gender gap widened during the pandemic period. The social expectations of women to take care of children increased the gender gap during the pandemic by putting greater responsibilities on women in comparison to men [ 29 ]. Women in academics were affected more in comparison to the men. Working from home burdened female educators with additional household duties and childcare responsibilities. A study done [ 32 ] in France, Germany, Italy, Norway, Sweden, the United States and the United Kingdom discovered that women were immensely affected by lockdown in comparison to men. On top of this, women with children are affected more than women without children.

No effect of age on physical discomfort was observed in this study but increasing use of online tools (such as class websites) for content creation and delivery and extended working periods were major contributors to health problems.

b. Mental health issues.

The psychological effects of the COVID-19 pandemics have also proved difficult to manage. Being at home all day with limited social interaction, not to mention other pandemic-related sources of stress, affected the mental health of many people. The majority of the participants in this study admitted experiencing mental health issues including anxious feelings, low mood, restlessness, hopelessness, and loneliness. According to UNESCO [ 33 ], due to the sudden closure of schools and adaptability to new systems, teachers across the world are suffering from stress. Studies conducted in various parts of the world confirmed similar trends [ 34 , 35 ]. In Israel, teachers reported psychological stress due to online teaching. 30.4% teachers reported being stressed in comparison to 6.1% teachers in traditional classroom settings [ 34 ]. In Spain, teachers experienced various kinds of mental health issues like anxiety, stress, and depression [ 36 ]. An Arabian study found an increased number of cases related to anxiety, depression, and violence during the pandemic [ 37 ]. In New Zealand teachers in Higher education reported being overwhelmed due to the online teaching [ 15 ].

Online teaching appears to have negatively affected the mental health of all the study participants. Women (94%) reported more mental health issues than men (91%), as shown in Fig 3 . Nearly two-thirds of participants said they had been dealing with mental health issues regularly and a third occasionally; only 7% said they never dealt with them. Findings of this study are in line with other studies which found that female teachers had higher levels of stress and anxiety in comparison to men [ 36 ]. Studies conducted in China reported that teachers developed mental health issues due to online classes [ 37 , 38 ].

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282287.g003

Our analysis indicated a positive relationship between the number of working hours and the frequency of mental health issues. Of the respondents who worked online for less than 3 hours, 55% experienced some kind of mental health issue; this rose to 60% of participants who worked online for 3–6 hours, and 66% of those who worked more than 6 hours every day. A chi-square test was applied to determine the relationship between the number of online working hours and the frequency of mental issues experienced by the participants and found it to be significant at the 0.05 level ( Table 3 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282287.t003

In terms of types of mental health issues, respondents reported restlessness, anxious feelings, and a sense of powerlessness, along with feelings of hopelessness, low mood, and loneliness as shown in Fig 4 . The stress of adapting to a new online working environment, the extended hours of work required to prepare content in new formats, the trial-and-error nature of learning and adopting new practices, uncertainty caused by lockdown, and an overall feeling of having no control were some of the contributing factors.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282287.g004

Mental health issues were more common among those under the age of 35, with 64% reporting a problem most of the time compared to 53% of those over 35. It has been found that job uncertainty is one of the primary causes of a higher prevalence of mental health concerns among younger respondents than among older respondents. These findings are in line with other studies which found higher levels of stress among the young people in comparison to older one [ 36 , 39 ]. Feelings of loneliness and a sense of no control were reported by 30% of respondents under the age of 35, with these feelings occurring constantly or most of the time; only 12% of respondent over the age of 35 reported experiencing these feelings always or most of the time. Of respondents under 35 years of age 61% felt lonely at some point during the COVID-19 pandemic, compared to only 40% of those age 35 or older.

This study also found gender-based differences in the frequency of mental health issues experienced, with 62% of male respondents and 52% of female respondents reporting that they had always experienced mental health issues. The types of issues also differed by gender, with men more likely to report restlessness and loneliness and women more likely to report feeling anxious or helpless. More female respondents reported feelings of hopelessness than male respondents (76% compared to 69%), and they were also more anxious (66%).

The uncertainty of the pandemic seems to have caused helplessness and anxious feelings for female teachers in particular, perhaps because a lack of paid domestic help increased the burden of household and caregiving tasks disproportionately for women at a time when the pressure to adapt to new online platforms was particularly acute. In some cases, respondents left their jobs to accommodate new family dynamics, since private employers offered no assistance or flexibility. Deterioration of mental health also led to the increased number of suicides in Japan during COVID-19 [ 39 ].

However, female teachers fared better than their male counterparts on some measures of mental health. Although half of the respondents (men and women equally) reported low mood during the pandemic, the men reported more restlessness (53%) and loneliness (59%) than the women (50% and 49%, respectively). Restrictions on eating and drinking outside the household may have had a disproportionate effect on male respondents, making them more likely to feel restless or lonely than their female counterparts, who may have handled COVID-related isolation better by being more involved in household work and caregiving.

Number of hours worked online was also a factor contributing to mental health issues. Just as respondents had more physical complaints (including eye strain, back and neck pain, and headaches) the more hours they worked online, respondents who worked longer hours online reported more mental health issues.

One of the major drawbacks of online education is the widespread occurrence of physical and mental health issues, and the results of this study corroborate concerns on this point. This study found that online teaching causes more mental and physical problems for teachers than another study, which only found that 52.7% of respondents had these problems [ 12 ].

A report by the University of Melbourne has also indicated that online teaching and learning have a negative effect on the physical and mental well-being of individuals. Teachers working from home, in particular, have reported isolation, excessive screen time, inability to cope with additional stress, and exhaustion due to increased workload; despite being wary of the risks of exposure to COVID-19, they were eager to return to the campus [ 27 ].

c. Support mechanisms.

In general, teachers experienced good support from family and colleagues during the pandemic, with 45.64% of teachers reported receiving strong support, 29.64 percent moderate support (although the remainder claimed to have received no or only occasional support from family and colleagues). 9.39% of male respondents reported that they have never received any support in comparison to 4.36% females. Female respondents reported receiving more support than male respondents perhaps because they have access to a more extensive network of family members and coworkers. Children, parents, and siblings were cited as the provider of a robust support system by most female respondents. For example, maternal relatives called or texted children to keep them engaged and helped them with homework, and female participants said their peers helped them to prepare lectures and materials. A link was also found between age and support; the older the respondent, the stronger the support system. A possible explanation for this difference is that older people have had time to develop stronger and longer-lasting professional and personal ties than younger people.

This study explored the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Indian education system and teachers working across six Indian states. The effectiveness of online education methods varied significantly by geographical location and demographics based on internet connectivity, access to smart devices, and teachers’ training. While premier higher education institutions and some private institutions had provided teachers with the necessary infrastructure and training to implement effective successful online learning with relatively few challenges, teachers at schools and community colleges have more often been left to adopt a trial-and-error approach to the transition to an online system. Further, it indicates that online education has had a significant effect on the quality of education imparted and the lives and wellbeing of teachers. While online learning has enabled teachers to reach out to students and maintain some normalcy during a time of uncertainty, it has also had negative consequences. Owing to the lack of in-person interaction with and among students in digital classes, the absence of creative learning tools in the online environment, glitches and interruptions in internet services, widespread cheating in exams, and lack of access to digital devices, online learning adversely affected the quality of education. Teachers experienced mounting physical and mental health issues due to stress of adjusting to online platforms without any or minimal ICT training and longer working hours to meet the demands of shifting responsibilities. A positive correlation was found between working hours and mental and physical health problems.

The long-term impact of COVID-19 pandemic on both the education system and the teachers would become clear only with time. Meanwhile, this study sheds light on some of the issues that teachers are facing and needs to be addressed without further ado. These findings will provide direction to the policy makers to develop sound strategies to address existing gaps for the successful implementation of digital learning. However, researchers should continue to investigate the longer-term effects of COVID pandemic on online education.

Supporting information

S1 file. supplementary material..

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282287.s001

• 1. WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard. [cited 14 Jan 2022]. Available: https://covid19.who.int
• View Article
• Google Scholar
• 3. unesco_covid-19_response_in_cambodia.pdf. Available: https://en.unesco.org/sites/default/files/unesco_covid-19_response_in_cambodia.pdf
• PubMed/NCBI
• 11. aser2020wave1report_feb1.pdf. Available: https://img.asercentre.org/docs/ASER%202021/ASER%202020%20wave%201%20-%20v2/aser2020wave1report_feb1.pdf
• 19. India Case Study.pdf. Available: https://www.unicef.org/rosa/media/16511/file/India%20Case%20Study.pdf
• 23. UNSDG | Policy Brief: Education during COVID-19 and beyond. [cited 21 Jan 2022]. Available: https://unsdg.un.org/resources/policy-brief-education-during-covid-19-and-beyond , https://unsdg.un.org/resources/policy-brief-education-during-covid-19-and-beyond
• 25. Report on rapid assessment of learning during school closures in context of COVID-19.pdf. Available: https://www.unicef.org/india/media/6121/file/Report%20on%20rapid%20assessment%20of%20learning%20during%20school%20closures%20in%20context%20of%20COVID-19.pdf
• 31. Reflections on motherhood and the impact of COVID 19 pandemic on women’s scientific careers—Guatimosim—2020—Journal of Neurochemistry—Wiley Online Library. [cited 30 Jun 2022]. Available: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jnc.15158
• 33. https://plus.google.com/+UNESCO . Adverse consequences of school closures. In: UNESCO [Internet]. 10 Mar 2020 [cited 30 Jun 2022]. Available: https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse/consequences

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

How teachers conduct online teaching during the covid-19 pandemic: a case study of taiwan.

• Department of Science Communication, National Pingtung University, Pingtung, Taiwan

Although online teaching has been encouraged for many years, the COVID-19 pandemic has promoted it on a large scale. During the COVID-19 pandemic, students at all levels (college, secondary school, and elementary school) were unable to attend school. To maintain student learning, most schools have adopted online teaching. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to explore the design of online teaching activities and online teaching processes adopted by teachers at all levels during the pandemic. Online questionnaires were administered to teachers in Taiwan who had conducted online teaching (including during the formal suspension of classes or simulation exercises) due to the pandemic. According to a quantitative analysis and lag sequential analysis, the instructional behaviors most frequently performed by teachers were roll calls, lectures with a presentation screen, in-class task (assignment) allocation, and whole-class synchronous video-/audio-based discussion. Thus, there were six common significant sequential behaviors among teachers at all levels that were categorized into the four instructional stages of identifying the teaching environment, teaching the class, discussing and evaluating learning effectiveness. College teachers reminded students of some matters first and then called the roll after the students went online. Secondary school teachers were more likely to arrange practical or experimental courses and to use synchronous and asynchronous interactive activities. Finally, elementary school teachers were more likely to use homemade videos and share their screens for teaching and to arrange a large variety of teaching interactions. The differences among colleges, secondary schools, and elementary schools were identified, and suggestions were made accordingly.

Introduction

Since 1990, Internet-based distance teaching has become a global trend, and software, hardware and educational training have been evolving. Nouns related to e-learning, such as online learning, distance teaching, digital learning, mobile learning and recent massive open online courses (MOOCs), have shown a trend of learning via the Internet. However, despite active promotion by governments, there are still many limitations to the online educational environment from teaching and learning perspectives ( Meskhi et al., 2019 ; Sadeghi, 2019 ), such as the support of the administrative system, the establishment of a network bandwidth and teachers’ willingness to record e-Learning materials.

Since the first report of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan (China) in December 2019, COVID-19 has rapidly spread worldwide ( Zhu et al., 2020 ). The World Health Organization (WHO) declared a public health emergency of international concern on January 30, 2020 and named the disease COVID-19 on February 11, 2020. On March 11, 2020, the WHO declared COVID-19 a global pandemic ( Singhal, 2020 ; World Health Organization, 2020 ).

Due to the respiratory illness caused by COVID-19, many countries have suspended all types of face-to-face activities, including in-person education. The COVID-19 pandemic has forced many changes in most life domains to meet the repercussions of the pandemic control measures, and the education sector was no exception. In many countries, colleges, secondary schools and elementary schools have adopted the strategy of online education during the pandemic. As a result, teachers and students have had to quickly alter their teaching methods, regardless of whether they were experienced in and prepared for online education. Because of this situation, a proper term has appeared in the academic domain: emergency remote education.

Online education-related studies and models have been promoted for years ( Sun and Chen, 2016 ). Before the COVID-19 pandemic, most of these studies were focused on colleges, while teachers and students in elementary and secondary schools remained inexperienced in emergency remote education ( Lestari and Gunawan, 2020 ). For example, Taiwan has promoted digital course certification at the university level for many years, and universities have also supported teachers in recording e-learning materials. Therefore, university teachers are more experienced in online teaching. However, in primary and secondary schools, digital teaching plays only a supplementary role. The pre-epidemic model is for students to go to classrooms. Therefore, teachers in primary and secondary schools have insufficient experience in switching to online teaching.

In response to COVID-19, schools at all levels needed an immediate shift towards online education, which can be both an opportunity and a challenge ( Toquero, 2020 ). Therefore, some studies have been conducted to discuss emergency remote education during the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, Crawford et al. (2020) investigated 20 countries’ responses to the COVID-19 epidemic. They pointed out that the response to higher education is diverse, including nonresponse, campus social isolation strategies, and rapid response to fully online courses. Watermeyer et al. (2020) reported a survey from 1,148 academics working in universities in the United Kingdom. They suggested that online migration is engendering significant dysfunctionality and disturbance to their pedagogical roles and their personal lives. Loima (2020) compared socio educational policies and arguments in Sweden and Finland during the COVID-19 pandemic. The results showed that Swedish and Finnish policy obscured mandates and restricted information. However, remote learning was successful in epidemiologic and curricular senses in Finnish. Basilaia and Kvavadze (2020) conducted a case study in Georgia. The Google Meet platform was implemented for online education with 950 students. The results indicated that the quick transition to the online form of education went successful and that gained experience can be used in the future. Putra et al. (2020) visited 10 websites in Indonesia to explore students’ learning experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. The results showed that student hardship in learning from home caused a lack of learning resources, such as not accessing the Internet and parents’ ability to support their children’s learning. In Cyprus, Souleles et al. (2020) believed that e-learning is not an add-on to existing teaching and learning practices and that disciplinary differences need to be considered. The provision of hurriedly set up workshops to enhance the skill gaps of teachers, although it is a necessary step, cannot replace the need for sustained training in both the pedagogical and technical areas. In Norway, Langford and Damsa (2020) discovered some phenomena, such as the Zoom revolution, a significant level of interactive online learning, innovations for involuntary teaching reform, collegial competence building and self-help, technological challenges and pedagogical insecurity. In Beijing, when the outbreak prevented people from going to school, the scholars of Peking University proposed the following five specific teaching strategies for online education in pandemic circumstances: 1) a high relevance between online instructional design and student learning; 2) the effective delivery of online instructional information; 3) adequate support provided by faculty and teaching assistants to students; 4) high-quality participation to improve the breadth and depth of students’ learning; and 5) contingency plans to address unexpected incidents on online education platforms ( Bao, 2020 ). In addition, many scholars in medical education have explored the challenges and future of online education in their own field. For example, Goh and Sandars (2020) indicated that major changes have been taking place in global medical education and that it is necessary to strengthen technological innovation to maintain teaching; they proposed that the use of artificial intelligence for adaptive learning and virtual reality might be future trends in medical education.

In addition to the abovementioned studies on overall education, there have been more studies that explore students’ opinions during emergency remote education. Abbasi et al. (2020) reported that when students were unable to go to school because of the epidemic, they did not like online learning as much as face-to-face teaching. Thus, school administrative departments and teachers should take the necessary measures to improve online educational environments. Based on a survey of 77 medical students in their classroom situations, Agarwal and Kaushik (2020) argued that students believed that online courses altered their normal procedures, saved a large amount of time and made it easy for them to obtain teaching materials. The main barriers to learning were the number of participants and technical failures during class conversations. Owusu-Fordjour et al. (2020) investigated online learning among 214 college students and found that the pandemic had a negative effect on their learning because many of them were not used to learning effectively on their own. As most of the students in this region could not access the Internet and lacked the technical knowledge of Internet devices, the learning platforms that were used also posed a challenge for them.

Most of the above studies on students’ opinions focused on college education because college students’ abilities for self-regulated learning in online education are better than those of primary and secondary students because of their age ( Heo and Han, 2018 ). However, when the pandemic began, all schools faced the challenge of switching to emergency remote education. Some studies have explored learning issues in elementary and secondary schools during the outbreak. For example, Sintema (2020) noted that Zambian primary and secondary schools enabled teachers and students to have classes via mobile phones and tablets by implementing e-learning and smart revision portals while increasing the number of mobile devices available for use. The study found that these teaching and learning methods helped teachers deliver teaching materials and students to be capable of self-regulated learning during the pandemic. In addition, Fauzi and Khusuma (2020) surveyed 45 elementary school students and identified problems in implementing online teaching, including 1) the availability of facilities, 2) network and Internet usage, 3) the planning, implementation, and evaluation of learning, and 4) collaboration with parents. The authors expected that online learning would be helpful to teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic, but their results indicated poor outcomes of online learning, with 80% of teachers reporting that they felt dissatisfied with online education.

Study Objectives

According to the abovementioned studies on the COVID-19 pandemic, teachers and students were forced to conduct online education regardless of their level of preparation for it. Most of the recent studies have investigated students’ feelings about online education and learning effectiveness, but there has been little discussion of teachers’ design of teaching activities when they had to switch to online teaching due to the pandemic. Accordingly, this study explored how teachers designed their teaching activities when they switched to online teaching due to the pandemic or how they conducted online teaching in the form of exercises to provide a reference for the future promotion of online education. As a result, the first objective of this study is to discuss teachers’ design of online teaching activity during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Moreover, our knowledge of teachers’ online teaching activities is based on online teaching activities in normal conditions. In addition, teaching activity plans are sequential ( Brown and Green, 2018 ). For example, Gagne’s model of instructional design includes 1) gaining attention, 2) informing the learner of the objective, 3) stimulating the recall of prerequisite learning, 4) presenting the stimulus material, 5) providing learning guidance, 6) eliciting the performance, 7) providing feedback, 8) assessing the performance, and 9) enhancing retention and transfer ( Khadjooi et al. (2011) . The second objective of this study is to explore which activities were carried out first and last and the order of teachers’ teaching activities. Thus, to understand the teaching activities adopted by teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic and the implementation of these teaching activities, this study used a lag sequential analysis to inform the discussion on this topic.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, students at all levels (college, secondary school and elementary school) were unable to attend school. Online teaching can continue to maintain learning activities when everyone is not going out. Therefore, to maintain students’ learning, most schools have adopted online teaching. In addition, for students of different ages, e.g., colleges, secondary schools and elementary schools, the teaching behaviors taken by teachers will be different ( Kennan et al., 2018 ). Understanding how teachers engage in online teaching behaviors at this emergency remote learning time can serve as a reference for the future promotion of e-learning. This study discusses teachers’ design of online teaching activity at all levels during the pandemic. The study explores the following two research questions:

What are the online teaching activities adopted by teachers due to the suspension of classroom teaching due to the COVID-19 pandemic? and

What are the similarities and differences among teachers from colleges, secondary schools and elementary schools in the design of their online teaching activity processes?

Methods and Materials

Data collection and participants.

This study mainly investigates teachers who had conducted online education (including during the formal suspension of classes and simulation exercises) because of the pandemic. Convenience sampling was adopted. Although many courses might have been changed to online teaching at the time that the teachers answered the questions, the study questionnaire asked about the teaching activity design of only one course. Data were collected from May 20 to June 30, 2020, by using a web-based questionnaire with a cross-sectional design. A total of 270 teachers answered the questionnaires, and 223 of the responses were valid. There were 23 college teachers (10.3%), 51 secondary school teachers (22.9%) and 149 elementary school teachers (66.8%).

In this study, a questionnaire on online teaching activities was developed based on the research purpose and some studies (i.e., Nilson and Goodson, 2017 ; Trust and Pektas, 2018 ; Sharoff, 2019 ). The questionnaire consisted of three major parts, namely, basic data (sex male and female), age (below 30 years old, 31–40 years old, 41–50 years old, 51–60 years old and over 61 years old), the served school (college or university, middle or high school, and elementary school), the years of teaching experience, online teaching experience (Were you experienced in online teaching prior to the pandemic (frequently, occasionally and never), Why did you conduct online teaching? (already in use, class suspension due to medical diagnosis and simulation exercises), and in most cases, which of the following methods do you choose for online teaching?) and the teaching process (synchronous teaching, asynchronous teaching and blended teaching). According to the various online teaching platforms and systems used (e.g., Google Classroom, iCAN, iLMS, Microsoft Teams, Moodle, Sunnet LMS, Adobe Connect, Cisco WebEx, CyberLink U Meeting, Google Meet, Jitsi Meet, JoinNet, LINE Chat, Zoom, YouTube Live broadcast, Facebook Live broadcast and Zuvio), the teaching processes were analyzed, summarized and then divided into the 4 categories of teaching (A), learning interaction (B), learning effectiveness (C) and others (D). After the online teaching activity questionnaire was prepared, three experts in online college education, one elementary school teacher, and one online education administrator of the education agency were invited to assist in the review of the questionnaire. The survey questionnaire was refined according to the suggestions received through the experts’ review. The instructional behaviors that comprise the teaching process are listed below.

 A1 Lecturing–presentation screen. A2 Lecturing–blackboard. A3 Sharing a screen with computer software. A4 Playing videos made by teachers. A5 Playing videos made by others. A6 Practical (experimental) demonstration.

B Learning Interaction

 B1 Whole-class synchronous text-based discussion. B2 Whole-class asynchronous text-based discussion. B3 Whole-class synchronous video-/audio-based discussion. B4 Whole-class asynchronous video-/audio-based discussion. B5 Whole-group synchronous text-based discussion. B6 Whole-group asynchronous text-based discussion. B7 Whole-group synchronous video-/audio-based discussion. B8 Whole-group asynchronous video-/audio-based discussion. B9 Whole-class whiteboard interaction. B10 Whole-group whiteboard interaction. B11 Student self-practice. B12 Operation by remote control. B13 Data collection and collation.

C Learning Effectiveness

 C1 In-class study experience. C2 In-class task (assignment) allocation. C3 In-class online test. C4 In-class online questionnaire. C5 In-class peer evaluation. C6 In-class work submission. C7 In-class assignment/work report. C8 After-class study experience. C9 After-class task (assignment) allocation. C10 After-class online test. C11 After-class online questionnaire. C12 After-class peer evaluation/voting. C13 After-class work submission.

 D1 Roll call D2 Inquiry about the status of hardware and software. D3 Reminders of other noncourse matters. D4 Others.

Data Analysis

In this study, descriptive statistics were used to analyze the basic data, the online teaching experience and the first research question. The second research question was analyzed through a lag sequential analysis ( Bakeman and Gottman, 1997 ). Lag sequential analysis ( Bakeman and Gottman, 1997 ) is used not only to explore a continuous sequence of behavioral coding categories (namely, an online teaching process) in which an initial behavioral coding category is followed by a subsequent category but also to visualize behavioral patterns. Researchers have mainly applied this method to the analysis of education issues. For example, Lin et al. (2020) developed a scaffolding-based collaborative problem-solving (CPS) learning environment to improve students’ learning in CPS activities. According to the study results, the learning performance was significantly better for the scaffolding mind tool group than for the study sheet group, and the scaffolding mind tool group showed more diverse cognitive process transitions in their behavioral patterns. Zarzour et al. (2020) investigated the behavioral patterns of students by using eBooks on Facebook for learning. The experimental results indicated significant behavioral learning sequences and revealed that the behaviors of liking, commenting, and sharing posts with peers showed the most significant differences between the students with higher and lower engagement. Wang and Liu (2020) discussed teachers’ current online teaching and students’ interaction and collaborative knowledge construction. According to the results, the design and organization of learning materials and the facilitation of discourse promoted students’ interaction, reduced the number of peripheral students, and supported students’ collaborative knowledge construction.

The following were the five steps in the lag sequential analysis: 1) calculating the number of transitions among the behavioral codes to obtain the transition frequency table; 2) calculating the conditional probability of the transitions among the codes based on the above sequential frequency matrix to produce the sequential transition conditional probability; 3) calculating the expected value of the overall transition process among the codes based on the sequential frequency matrix; 4) verifying whether all sequences were significantly continuous one-by-one based on the Z-score values of the transition frequency calculated from the above three matrices (adjusted residuals table); and 5) drawing the sequence transition association diagram with nodes that represent all coding behaviors connected by arrows for further inferential analysis.

Results and Discussion

Basic data and online teaching experience.

The Google online questionnaire was adopted in this study, and all questions must be answered to be valid. As shown in Table 1 , a total of 223 valid questionnaires were collected in this study. In terms of sex, there were 100 males (44.8%) and 123 females (55.2%), and there was virtually no difference in the numbers of males and females. Therefore, this study is not affected by gender differences. Regarding age, there were 23 people (13.3%) under 30 years old, 24 people (10.8%) between 31 and 40 years, 57 people (25.6%) between 41 and 50 years, 106 people (47.5%) between 51 and 60 years, and 36 people (16.1%) aged 61 years or over. Most of the respondents were between 41 and 60 years old. In the quartile of age, Q1 was 31–40 years, and Q2 (median) and Q3 were 41–50 years. Regarding the years of teaching experience, there were 12 teachers (5.4%) with less than 1 year of service, 26 teachers (11.7%) with 1–5 years of service, 21 teachers (9.4%) with 6–10 years of service, 54 teachers (24.2%) with 11–15 years of service, 57 teachers (25.6%) with 16–20 years of service, and 53 teachers (23.8%) with more than 21 years of service. In the quartile of teaching experience, Q1 is 1–5 years, Q2 (median) is 16–20 years, and Q3 is more than 21 years. Most teachers were found to have many years of experience. At the school level, there were 23 college teachers (10.3%), 51 secondary school teachers (22.9%), and 149 elementary school teachers (66.8%). Thus, most of the respondents were elementary school teachers, followed by secondary school teachers.

TABLE 1 . Participants’ characteristics, including their online teaching experience.

Then, the study examined whether teachers were experienced in online teaching prior to the pandemic. Fourteen teachers (6.3%) had frequently engaged in online teaching, 79 (35.4%) had engaged in it occasionally, and 130 (58.3%) had never engaged in it, which shows that more than half of the teachers had no experience in online teaching. As a result, the reason why online teaching had been adopted was explored. In total, 21 teachers had been teaching online prior to the pandemic (9.4%), seven taught online due to a medical diagnosis (3.1%), and 195 taught online as a part of simulation exercises (87.4%); these findings show that the primary reason for switching to online teaching was simulation exercises, as the COVID-19 pandemic in Taiwan was well controlled. Regarding the modes frequently used in online teaching, 89 teachers (39.9%) used synchronous teaching (teachers and students go online at the same time to carry out teaching and learning activities), 65 teachers (29.1%) used asynchronous teaching (teachers upload teaching materials to the network platform, and students can watch them online within a specified time and carry out learning activities), and 69 teachers (30.9%) used blended teaching (teaching and learning activities that combine both synchronous and asynchronous modes); thus, similar proportions of the teachers used the three teaching modes.

Teaching Activities

The 223 teachers who returned valid questionnaires had a total of 1,310 instructional behaviors, with an average of 5.87 instructional behaviors for each teacher. Table 2 shows the overall instructional behaviors, and the number and percentage of instructional behaviors in elementary schools, secondary schools, and colleges.

TABLE 2 . Number and percentage of various instructional behaviors.

Overall, there were 329 data points (25.11%) for teaching (A), 340 data points (25.95%) for learning interaction (B), 383 data points (29.24%) for learning effectiveness (C), and 258 data points (19.69%) for others (D). The proportion of other instructional behaviors was similar to but slightly lower than the proportions of the remaining three teaching categories. Among the four teaching categories, the top four behaviors were roll call (D1) with 132 data points (10.08%), lecturing with a presentation screen (A1) with 124 data points (9.47%), in-class task (assignment) allocation (C2) with 104 data points (7.94%), and whole-class synchronous video-/audio-based discussion (B3) with 103 data points (7.86%). Thus, the most common behavior in each category was teaching behavior.

Then, the four teaching categories were analyzed from an overall perspective. In teaching (A), lecturing with a presentation screen (A1) was the most frequently used ( N = 124, 9.47%), followed by sharing a screen with computer software (A3) (N = 101, 7.71%); this shows that most teachers frequently lectured with a presentation screen and shared their computer screens in online teaching. In learning interaction (B), whole-class synchronous video-/audio-based discussion (B3) was the most frequently used ( N = 103, 7.86%), followed by student self-practice (B11) ( N = 82, 6.26%); this indicates that the teachers often conducted a whole-class synchronous discussion after teaching and allowed students to become familiar with the teaching content through their own practice. In addition, we also found that the teachers conducted more activities in entire classes than in groups. Although group learning is a common teaching activity in classroom teaching, in the online teaching environment, group interaction is rarely adopted by teachers because of the limitations imposed by the functional design of the learning platform or system. In learning effectiveness (C), the most common and second-most common instructional behaviors both concerned task (assignment) allocation, including class-task (assignment) allocation (C2) with 104 data points (7.94%), and after-class task (assignment) allocation (C9) with 69 data points (5.27%). By comparing all behaviors in class and after class, we found that the frequency of all in-class behaviors ( N = 224, 17.11%) was larger than the frequency of after-class behaviors ( N = 159, 12.14%), which suggests that the teachers mostly evaluated teaching effectiveness in class. Finally, in the other category (D), the most common mode was roll call (D1) with 132 data points (10.08%), followed by inquiry about the status of hardware and software (D2) with 74 data points (5.65%). These two items were important preclass activities in online teaching, although they do not take much time in classroom teaching.

Finally, the study explored the similarities and differences among colleges, secondary schools, and elementary schools in the four categories. In terms of teaching (A), we found that lecturing with a presentation screen (A1) was the most frequently used, followed by sharing a screen with computer software (A3), regardless of the learning stage. In terms of playing videos, we found that most videos played in colleges were made by teachers (A4), while the videos played in secondary and elementary schools were made by others (A5); this shows that college teachers were more likely to make course videos for students to watch. Practical (experimental) demonstration (A6) was the least used. Although physical education courses and experimental courses still existed in the curriculum, the teachers seldom performed practice or experiments in the online teaching environment. In terms of learning interaction (B), we found that whole-class synchronous video-/audio-based discussion (B3) was the most frequently used, regardless of the learning stage. Moreover, unlike student practice (B11), whole-class synchronous text-based discussion (B1) was frequently used in colleges and secondary schools but was less frequently used in elementary schools, while whole-class whiteboard interaction (B9) was frequently used in elementary schools; this indicates that the teachers were more likely to arrange synchronous text-based discussion activities for older students. Finally, we found that data collection and collation (B13), a common activity in online teaching, was used in some secondary and elementary schools but not in colleges. In terms of learning effectiveness (C), we found that task (assignment) allocation (C2 and C9) was the most frequently used, regardless of the learning stage. Second, assignment and work reports (C7 and C13) were commonly used by college teachers for evaluation, online tests (C3 and C10) were commonly used by secondary and elementary teachers for evaluation, and there was almost no difference in their use between online teaching and the current situation in classroom teaching. In terms of the other category (D), based on the proportions of teachers who used the behaviors, we found that the most common behaviors were roll calls (D1), inquiries about the status of hardware and software (D2), and reminders of other noncourse matters (D3), regardless of the learning stage. These behaviors were important for online teaching, but the questionnaire did not dedicate many questions to these behaviors.

Teaching Behavioral Sequence

During the lag sequential analysis, the adjusted residuals table was calculated, where the columns represent initial behaviors, and the rows signify the behaviors that occurred immediately after the behaviors listed in the columns. A Z-score greater than 1.96 indicated that the sequence was significant. In this study, there were 49, 58, and 104 significant behavioral sequences for colleges, secondary schools and elementary schools, respectively (as shown in the Supplementary Appendix ). With the 36 instructional behaviors examined in this study, there were many significant behavioral sequences in each learning stage. To facilitate the discussion, the common significant behavioral sequences of colleges, secondary schools, and elementary schools were first extracted, and six significant behavioral sequences were identified in total. Second, to compare the differences among colleges, secondary schools, and elementary schools in the teaching process, significant behavioral sequences with Z-score values greater than five were discussed. There were 11, 10, and 15 significant behavioral sequences with Z-score values greater than five in colleges, secondary schools and elementary schools, respectively. The values shown in Table 3 are the Z-scores.

TABLE 3 . Significant behavioral sequences (similarities and differences Z-score>5).

There were six common significant behavioral sequences in colleges, secondary schools, and elementary schools ( Figure 1 ). The six significant behavioral sequences were divided into four stages. The first stage included roll calls and the confirmation of an effective online teaching environment (D1→D2). The next stage was teaching the class. The common teaching methods were presentation (A1) and screen sharing (A3). The next stage after teaching included text-based synchronous discussion (A1→B5 and A3→B1). The final stage was the evaluation of learning effectiveness (B5→C7 and C3→C4). Overall, the common significant behavioral sequences in colleges, secondary schools and elementary schools, namely, identifying the teaching environment, teaching the class, discussing and evaluating learning effectiveness, were similar to the usual teaching processes.

FIGURE 1 . Overall behavioral transfer diagram.

Then, the characteristics of the teaching processes in colleges, secondary schools and elementary schools were compared based on the significant behavioral sequences with Z-score values greater than 5. To provide a basis for comparison, the abovementioned phases, i.e., 1) identifying the teaching environment, 2) teaching the class, 3) discussing and 4) evaluating learning effectiveness, were used for discussion. First, colleges ( Figure 2 ) were more likely than secondary and elementary schools to use the following sequence: reminders for students of other noncurriculum matters (D3) → roll call (D1). This may be because, compared with secondary and elementary school teachers, college teachers are more likely to call roll after reminding students of matters during class and waiting for students to go online. This not only presents the actual situation of the physical classroom but also represents the teacher’s differences in class management for students of different ages. In the teaching class stage, there was one common behavioral sequence between college teachers and elementary school teachers, namely, lecturing with a blackboard (A2) → practical (experimental) demonstration (A6). This may be because some experimental course teachers are used to lecture with a blackboard and directly filme experimental courses with cameras. In the discussing stage, college teachers engaged in less interactive learning behaviors than secondary and elementary school teachers, but most of their behaviors were carried out in groups (A5→B6, B5→B10, B10→B3). Finally, in the evaluating learning effectiveness stage, college teachers had more diversified evaluation methods, including practice, tests, and questionnaires. Moreover, college teachers arranged many in-class and after-class evaluations (C1→C12, C3→C12 and C4→C12).

FIGURE 2 . Behavioral transfer diagram for colleges.

Second, in secondary schools ( Figure 3 ), teachers were more likely to arrange practical or experimental courses and then carry out interactive activities such as discussions or questionnaires (A6→B2, A6→B4 and A6→C11). In conducting interactive activities, teachers in secondary schools were more likely to use synchronous and asynchronous methods than teachers in colleges or elementary schools. Finally, in the stage of evaluating learning effectiveness, secondary school teachers had more diversified evaluation methods than college or elementary school teachers, including tests, questionnaires, and practice.

FIGURE 3 . Behavioral transfer diagram for secondary schools.

In elementary schools ( Figure 4 ), teachers were more likely to use homemade videos and share their screens while teaching and then conduct discussions (A3→B3, A5→B2, A5→B7). The teaching interactions arranged by elementary school teachers were diversified, and discussions containing audio and text were conducted with synchronous and asynchronous methods. Elementary school teachers, similar to college and secondary school teachers, used a variety of evaluation methods. In addition, elementary school teachers arranged many in-class evaluations, and after-class assignments, which is similar to general classroom teaching.

FIGURE 4 . Behavioral transfer diagram for elementary schools.

Discussion and Conclusion

During the COVID-19 pandemic, students at all levels (colleges, secondary schools, and elementary schools) were unable to attend school, and most schools switched to online teaching. To understand the design of online teaching activities among teachers at all levels, online questionnaires were adopted in this study to investigate teachers in Taiwan who had conducted online teaching due to the pandemic. There were 223 valid questionnaires.

The first objective was to explore teachers’ online teaching activities when classroom teaching was suspended due to COVID-19. Based on the results of the frequencies of behaviors in the teaching, learning interaction, learning effectiveness and other categories, the top four instructional behaviors were roll calls, lecturing with a presentation screen, in-class task (assignment) allocation and whole-class synchronous video-/audio-based discussion. Then, the study explored the similarities and differences among colleges, secondary schools, and elementary schools in the four categories. In terms of teaching, lecturing with a presentation screen was the most frequently used, regardless of the learning stage. In terms of playing videos, most videos played in colleges were made by teachers, while most videos played in secondary and elementary schools were made by others. In terms of learning interaction, we found that whole-class synchronous video-/audio-based discussion was the most frequently used, regardless of the learning stage. In addition, teachers’ arrangement of synchronous text-based discussions depended on the learning level. In terms of learning effectiveness, task (assignment) allocation was the most frequent behavior, regardless of the learning stage. Second, assignments and work reports were commonly used by college teachers for evaluation, while teachers in secondary and elementary schools were more likely to use online tests for evaluation. Finally, in terms of the other category, we found that roll calls and inquiries about the learning environment, such as the status of hardware and software, were necessary for online teaching, regardless of the learning stage.

Overall, more time was spent on roll calls and inquiries about the status of hardware and software in online teaching than in classroom teaching. This means that teachers’ technical capabilities for online teaching, students’ familiarity with digital platforms, and the software and hardware assistance provided by the school’s information center will all affect the quality of e-learning. Moreover, in terms of teaching, interaction and evaluation, the arrangement of these activities among teachers at all levels was slightly different from the arrangement of these activities in classroom teaching, and appropriate teaching activities could be designed according to the online teaching environment. Despite the limitations of online teaching platforms, online learning activities can still be carried out.

The second objective of this study was to explore the similarities and differences among college, secondary school and elementary school teachers in the design of the online teaching activity process. According to the sequential behavioral analysis, the common significant behavioral sequences of colleges, secondary school and elementary schools were divided into 1) roll calls and identification of the teaching environment, 2) teaching through presentation and screen demonstration, 3) synchronous text-based discussion, and 4) an effectiveness evaluation. Overall, the common significant behavioral sequences of colleges, secondary schools and elementary schools were similar to the usual teaching processes. In terms of the characteristics, some college teachers reminded students of some matters first and then called the roll after students went online. During class, some teachers in experimental or practical courses were used to lecture with a blackboard, and directly filme experimental courses with cameras. Moreover, college teachers engaged in less interactive learning behaviors, but most of their behaviors were carried out in groups. Second, secondary school teachers were more likely to arrange practical or experimental courses and to use synchronous and asynchronous interactive activities. Finally, elementary school teachers were more likely to use homemade videos and share their screens for teaching and to arrange a large variety of teaching interactions; in addition, discussions containing audio and text were conducted with both synchronous and asynchronous methods.

Overall, colleges, secondary schools, and elementary schools had common significant sequential behaviors, including roll calls and the identification of the teaching environment, teaching through presentation and screen sharing, synchronous text-based discussion and an effectiveness evaluation. Moreover, college, secondary, and elementary school teachers had similar characteristics in the design of their teaching activity processes. In addition to these similar characteristics, college, secondary, and elementary school teachers also have some different characteristics. These different characteristics show that teachers at different stages of learning vary in their teaching strategies. These differences, in addition to showing the current teaching situation, can also provide scholars with information for related follow-up research.

According to the conclusions generated based on the descriptive analysis and lag sequential analysis, the following suggestions can be made.

Despite the small proportion of online practical and experimental courses, as evidenced by the observed online instructional behaviors, such courses are arranged in classroom teaching. It is suggested that when relevant, teachers should consider in advance how to respond to challenges in implementing practical and experimental courses in online teaching.

Discussion is more important in the online teaching environment than in general classroom teaching ( Wu, 2016 ). This study found that whole-class synchronous video-/audio-based discussion was the most frequently used method. Thus, whether activities are conducted as a class or in groups and whether synchronous or asynchronous discussion is used, teachers should improve the online discussion layout and their online leadership skills ( Tseng et al., 2019 ).

In classroom teaching, problem-based learning (PBL) courses are often arranged, which require students to collect and collate data through the Internet ( Dolmans et al., 2016 ). However, in this study, the rate of data collection and collation was low, even in the online education environment, but the activities of data collection and collation in the online learning environment are more suitable for adoption. Therefore, it is suggested that teachers should design activities of data collection and collation for more diversified teaching activities.

Due to the pandemic, people have been restricted in their ability to leave home. Therefore, in addition to the synchronous activities in class during teaching time, it is suggested that teachers arrange after-class asynchronous activities so that students can carry out learning activities when they cannot go out.

In classroom teaching, it does not take much time to call roll or manage hardware and software. However, the two behaviors are important in the online teaching environment. Thus, both teachers and learning platforms or system developers should think about how to reduce the time spent on roll calls and the management of hardware and software.

In terms of the research limitations and suggestions for future studies, this study took Taiwan’s teachers as an example; it is suggested that cross-country comparisons be carried out in future studies. Second, this study mainly discussed the situations, similarities and differences of colleges, secondary schools and elementary schools in the teaching activities and processes affected by the pandemic. However, teaching activities are also influenced by the course that is being taught. Thus, it is suggested that future researchers base their discussions on various types of courses. Finally, teachers’ preparation for online teaching affects the quality of online education ( Hung, 2016 ), which was not analyzed in this study. Therefore, it is suggested that future researchers compare the differences in teachers’ experiences with online teaching.

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Author Contributions

The author contributed to the conception of the idea, implementing and analyzing the experimental results, and writing the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest

The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Supplementary Material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2021.675434/full#supplementary-material

Abbasi, S., Ayoob, T., Malik, A., and Memon, S. I. (2020). Perceptions of Students Regarding E-Learning during Covid-19 at a Private Medical College. Pak J. Med. Sci. 36, S57–S61. doi:10.12669/pjms.36.COVID19-S4.2766

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Agarwal, S., and Kaushik, J. S. (2020). Student's Perception of Online Learning during COVID Pandemic. Indian J. Pediatr. 87 (7), 554. doi:10.1007/s12098-020-03327-7

Bakeman, R., and Gottman, J. M. (1997). Observing Interaction: An Introduction to Lag Sequential Analysis . 2nd ed. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press . doi:10.1017/cbo9780511527685

CrossRef Full Text

Bao, W. (2020). COVID ‐19 and Online Teaching in Higher Education: A Case Study of Peking University. Hum. Behav Emerg Tech 2 (2), 113–115. doi:10.1002/hbe2.191

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Basilaia, G., and Kvavadze, D. (2020). Transition to Online Education in Schools during a SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic in Georgia. Pedagogical Res. 5 (4), 1–9. doi:10.29333/pr/7937

Brown, A. H., and Green, T. D. (2018). Beyond Teaching Instructional Design Models: Exploring the Design Process to advance Professional Development and Expertise. J. Comput. High Educ. 30 (1), 176–186. doi:10.1007/s12528-017-9164-y

Crawford, J., Butler-Henderson, K., Rudolph, J., Malkawi, B., Glowatz, M., Burton, R., and Lam, S. (2020). COVID-19: 20 Countries' Higher Education Intra-period Digital Pedagogy Responses. J. Appl. Learn. Teach. 3 (1), 1–20. doi:10.37074/jalt.2020.3.1.7

Dolmans, D. H. J. M., Loyens, S. M. M., Marcq, H., and Gijbels, D. (2016). Deep and Surface Learning in Problem-Based Learning: a Review of the Literature. Adv. Health Sci. Educ. 21 (5), 1087–1112. doi:10.1007/s10459-015-9645-6

Fauzi, I., and Sastra Khusuma, I. H. (2020). Teachers' Elementary School in Online Learning of COVID-19 Pandemic Conditions. J. Iqra. 5 (1), 58–70. doi:10.25217/ji.v5i1.914

Goh, P.-S., and Sandars, J. (2020). A Vision of the Use of Technology in Medical Education after the COVID-19 Pandemic. MedEdPublish 9, 1. doi:10.15694/mep.2020.000049.1

Heo, J., and Han, S. (2018). Effects of Motivation, Academic Stress and Age in Predicting Self-Directed Learning Readiness (SDLR): Focused on Online College Students. Educ. Inf. Technol. 23 (1), 61–71. doi:10.1007/s10639-017-9585-2

Hung, M.-L. (2016). Teacher Readiness for Online Learning: Scale Development and Teacher Perceptions. Comput. Educ. 94, 120–133. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.012

Kennan, S., Bigatel, P., Stockdale, S., and Hoewe, J. (2018). The (Lack of) Influence of Age and Class Standing on Preferred Teaching Behaviors for Online Students. Online Learn. 22 (1), 163–181. doi:10.24059/olj.v22i1.1086

Khadjooi, K., Rostami, K., and Ishaq, S. (2011). How to Use Gagne's Model of Instructional Design in Teaching Psychomotor Skills. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. Bed Bench 4 (3), 116–119.

PubMed Abstract Google Scholar

Langford, M., and Damsa, C. (2020). Online Teaching in the Time of COVID-19: Academic Teachers’ Experiences in Norway . Centre for Experiential Legal Learning (CELL), University of Oslo .

Lestari, P. A. S., and Gunawan, G. (2020). The Impact of Covid-19 Pandemic on Learning Implementation of Primary and Secondary School Levels. Indonesian J. Elem. Child. Educ. 1 (2), 58–63.

Google Scholar

Lin, P.-C., Hou, H.-T., and Chang, K.-E. (2020). The Development of a Collaborative Problem Solving Environment that Integrates a Scaffolding Mind Tool and Simulation-Based Learning: an Analysis of Learners' Performance and Their Cognitive Process in Discussion. Interactive Learn. Environments . doi:10.1080/10494820.2020.1719163

Loima, J. (2020). Socio-Educational Policies and Covid-19 - A Case Study on Finland and Sweden in the Spring 2020. Int. J. Edu. Literacy. Studies. 8 (3), 59–75. doi:10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.8n.3p.59

Meskhi, B., Ponomareva, S., and Ugnich, E. (2019). E-learning in Higher Inclusive Education: Needs, Opportunities and Limitations. Int. J. Edu. Manag. 33 (3), 424–437. doi:10.1108/IJEM-09-2018-0282

Nilson, L. B., and Goodson, L. A. (2017). Online Teaching at its Best: Merging Instructional Design with Teaching and Learning Research . Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons .

Owusu-Fordjour, C., Koomson, C. K., and Hanson, D. (2020). The Impact of Covid-19 on Learning-The Perspective of the Ghanaian Student. Eur. J. Educ. Stud. 7 (3), 88–101. doi:10.5281/zenodo.3753

Putra, P., Liriwati, F. Y., Tahrim, T., Syafrudin, S., and Aslan, A. (2020). The Students Learning from home Experiences during Covid-19 School Closures Policy in Indonesia. J. Iqra. 5 (2), 30–42. doi:10.25217/ji.v5i2.1019

Sadeghi, M. (2019). A Shift from Classroom to Distance Learning: Advantages and Limitations. Int. J. Res. English. Edu. 4 (1), 80–88. doi:10.29252/ijree.4.1.80

Sharoff, L. (2019). Creative and Innovative Online Teaching Strategies: Facilitation for Active Participation. Jeo 16 (2), 2. doi:10.9743/jeo.2019.16.2.9

Singhal, T. (2020). A Review of Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19). Indian J. Pediatr. 87 (4), 281–286. doi:10.1007/s12098-020-03263-6

Sintema, E. J. (2020). E-learning and Smart Revision Portal for Zambian Primary and Secondary School Learners: A Digitalized Virtual Classroom in the COVID-19 Era and beyond. Aquademia , 4(2), ep20017. doi:10.29333/aquademia/8253

Souleles, N., Laghos, A., and Savva, S. (2020). “From Face-To-Face to Online: Assessing the Effectiveness of the Rapid Transition of Higher Education Due to the Coronavirus Outbreak,” in 15th International Technology, Education and Development Conference , Cyprus , November 9–10, 2020 . doi:10.21125/iceri.2020.0274

Sun, A., and Chen, X. (2016). Online Education and its Effective Practice: A Research Review. JITE:Research 15, 157–190. doi:10.28945/3502

Toquero, C. M. (2020). Challenges and Opportunities for Higher Education amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Philippine Context. Pedagogical Res. 5 (4), em0063. doi:10.29333/pr/7947

Trust, T., and Pektas, E. (2018). Using the ADDIE Model and Universal Design for Learning Principles to Develop an Open Online Course for Teacher Professional Development. J. Digital Learn. Teach. Educ. 34 (4), 219–233. doi:10.1080/21532974.2018.1494521

Tseng, H., Yi, X., and Yeh, H.-T. (2019). Learning-related Soft Skills Among Online Business Students in Higher Education: Grade Level and Managerial Role Differences in Self-Regulation, Motivation, and Social Skill. Comput. Hum. Behav. 95, 179–186. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.035

Wang, Y., and Liu, Q. (2020). Effects of Online Teaching Presence on Students' Interactions and Collaborative Knowledge Construction. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 36 (3), 370–382. doi:10.1111/jcal.12408

Watermeyer, R., Crick, T., Knight, C., and Goodall, J. (2020). COVID-19 and Digital Disruption in UK Universities: Afflictions and Affordances of Emergency Online Migration. High Educ. (Dordr) 81, 623–641. doi:10.1007/s10734-020-00561-y

World Health Organization (2020). Coronavirus Disease (COVID-2019) Situation Reports (Situation report - 51). Available at: www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situation-reports .

Wu, S.-Y. (2016). The Effect of Teaching Strategies and Students' Cognitive Style on the Online Discussion Environment. Asia-pacific Edu Res. 25 (2), 267–277. doi:10.1007/s40299-015-0259-9

Zarzour, H., Bendjaballah, S., and Harirche, H. (2020). Exploring the Behavioral Patterns of Students Learning with a Facebook-Based E-Book Approach. Comput. Educ. 156, 103957. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103957

Zhu, N., Zhang, D., Wang, W., Li, X., Yang, B., Song, J., et al. (2020). A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019. N. Engl. J. Med. 382, 727–733. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2001017

Keywords: COVID-19, e-learning, online teaching, lag sequential analysis (LSA), emergency remote education (ERE)

Citation: Wu S-Y (2021) How Teachers Conduct Online Teaching During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Case Study of Taiwan. Front. Educ. 6:675434. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2021.675434

Received: 03 March 2021; Accepted: 06 May 2021; Published: 28 May 2021.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2021 Wu. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Sheng-Yi Wu, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• J Microbiol Biol Educ
• v.22(1); 2021

Three Steps to Adapt Case Studies for Synchronous and Asynchronous Online Learning †

Andrea bixler.

1 Clarke University, Science and Mathematics Department, Dubuque, IA 52001

Melissa Eslinger

2 United States Military Academy, Department of Chemistry & Life Science, West Point, NY 10996

Adam J. Kleinschmit

3 University of Dubuque, Department of Natural and Applied Sciences, Dubuque, IA 52001

Monica M. Gaudier-Diaz

4 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Psychology & Neuroscience, Chapel Hill, NC 27599

Usha Sankar

5 Fordham University, Department of Biology, Bronx, NY 10458

Patricia Marsteller

6 Emory University, Department of Biology, Atlanta, GA 30322

Carlos C. Goller

7 North Carolina State University, Department of Biological Sciences, Raleigh, NC 27695

Sabrina Robertson

Associated data.

Pandemic SARS-CoV-2 has ushered in a renewed interest in science along with rapid changes to educational modalities. While technology provides a variety of ways to convey learning resources, the incorporation of alternate modalities can be intimidating for those designing curricula. We propose strategies to permit rapid adaptation of curricula to achieve learning in synchronous, asynchronous, or hybrid learning environments. Case studies are a way to engage students in realistic scenarios that contextualize concepts and highlight applications in the life sciences. While case studies are commonly available and adaptable to course goals, the practical considerations of how to deliver and assess cases in online and blended environments can instill panic. Here we review existing resources and our collective experiences creating, adapting, and assessing case materials across different modalities. We discuss the benefits of using case studies and provide tips for implementation. Further, we describe functional examples of a three-step process to prepare cases with defined outcomes for individual student preparation, collaborative learning, and individual student synthesis to create an inclusive learning experience, whether in a traditional or remote learning environment.

INTRODUCTION

Case studies come in many forms but typically have a narrative to engage students and bring course content to life through storytelling ( 1 ). They encourage active learning, peer interactions, and critical thinking ( 2 ). Case studies can be used in various teaching modalities, including online synchronous or asynchronous lectures and labs. Many cases are available for face-to-face instruction ( Appendix 1, Table S1 ); here we outline best practices ( 3 , 4 ) for adapting cases for the online classroom, with examples from our own teaching.

Case studies are often modified prior to implementation. Here we provide ideas for adapting cases for online teaching with a three-step implementation approach: individual student preparation, collaborative learning, and individual student synthesis ( Fig. 1 ). We also use examples from our experiences teaching case studies online, focusing on a case implemented with 120 students imagining themselves as researchers conducting epileptic drug discovery research. Students use the Allen Cell Types Database ( https://celltypes.brain-map.org/ ), analyzing data on temporal lobe neuron excitability and how cells in this seizure-prone area may be distinct from other brain regions (contact SR for case access).

Three-step implementation framework for integrating case studies in the distance learning classroom.

Step 1: Individual student preparation

Individual student preparation is paramount across modalities. With online case teaching, we recommend a flipped approach in which students independently examine key background information asynchronously before engaging in active learning with peers ( http://rtalbert.org/how-to-define-flipped-learning/ ) ( 5 , 6 ). Guidelines and examples for delivering flipped cases using videos are available from the National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science ( 7 ) and include the suggestion that videos be used to set the scene (introduce the story), as well as to present content. Table S2 (Appendix 1) highlights resources for creating or finding videos. Brame ( 8 ) provides information on producing effective videos, including reducing cognitive load, increasing student engagement, and promoting active learning (e.g., keep videos short and focused, use both verbal and visual cues, incorporate videos into assignments). Logistical details such as planning the video, video production tools and copyright are emphasized in Prud’homme-Généreux et al . ( 6 ).

If videos are not your style and/or students have limited bandwidth, provide documents (Word or PowerPoint) within the Learning Management System (LMS) for each part or step of the case. Adding graded questions is essential to make learning more active and demonstrates your expectation that students engage with the materials. These assignments provide a common framework for students before class and low-stakes formative assessment of learning to help faculty screen for common misconceptions (“Just-in-Time Teaching”; https://serc.carleton.edu/introgeo/justintime/index.html ). For instance, within the epilepsy case study, students read a neuroscience text excerpt, watched a video, and answered questions as they explored the Allen Cell Types database. The instructors then reviewed student comprehension and addressed misconceptions during the synchronous session.

Step 2: Collaborative learning replaces face-to-face class and labs

The next step is the online collaborative experience. Be prepared for students who cannot participate synchronously. Have asynchronous alternatives ready and/or record synchronous sessions ( https://www.idra.org/resource-center/ensuring-equity-in-online-learning-newsletter-article/ ). Whether students meet synchronously or asynchronously, we find small group work to be particularly beneficial. The expectation is that students will interact, share information, and challenge each other’s ideas ( Appendix 1, Table S3 ) ( 9 ). Research suggests outcomes are improved with demographically heterogeneous groups ( 10 ). However, if groups meet asynchronously, it may be best to let students choose teams based on availability (Y. Lin, personal communication). Group work might include discussion questions or other active learning such as jigsaws, gallery walks, or collaborative concept mapping (11–13; https://serc.carleton.edu/introgeo/gallerywalk/what.html ). Another option is data collection and analysis, which is a core biology competency ( 14 ) and essential for remote lab instruction. All of these can be adjusted for synchronous or asynchronous online learning with the appropriate collaborative technology ( Appendix 1, Table S3 ).

It is important to engage all students in group work. One technique is to assign each student a specific role in the group; this improves individual learning ( 15 ). Roles could align to POGIL (Manager, Recorder, Spokesperson, and Reflector; https://ctl.wustl.edu/resources/using-roles-in-group-work/ ). In an asynchronous course, one colleague assigns students to be the Point Person, Weekly Summarizer, and Explorer, the last of whom discovers and shares related information from a source other than those provided (L. Rettenmeier, submitted for publication). Note that in asynchronous discussions, setting deadlines for initial sharing and for later wrap-up is necessary so students can respond to peers in a timely fashion.

Faculty-student conversation during breakout sessions can help identify confusing concepts. These can be addressed by sending a chat message to the whole class. Teaching assistants can assist with this in large classes. Written work could also increase engagement but is not a substitute for faculty-student interaction that prods students toward higher-level thinking. Polling can be used for a quick assessment of comprehension through multiple-choice or short-answer questions, such as “type one word to describe the most important thing you learned about X.”

For the epilepsy case, students were assigned to Zoom breakout rooms to collect data and share it via a collaborative class Google document. Individual roles were not assigned during data collection, but each student was expected to contribute data from a specified number of neurons. The data analysis portion could have benefited from assigned roles, for example, a Recorder to maintain a chronology of data input and findings, an Explorer to perform the data analysis, and a Statistician to manage statistical tools and interpretations. Data collection and analysis may present challenges for large classes as greater numbers of student groups require additional faculty oversight. A parallel online forum (Piazza) allowed students to post questions and get answers from instructors and other students.

Step 3: Individual student synthesis

After the collaborative learning, hold students accountable with individual work ( 3 , 4 ) in which they apply knowledge in new ways. For instance, students may use newly learned concepts and apply them to a novel scenario, propose additional experiments, or extend the same approach to a new story or dataset. Students could also reflect on how the case relates broadly to science and the community ( 16 ). These tasks encourage higher-order skills ( 17 ). Ideally, students should submit individual short answers graded for correctness, but this might prove difficult in large classes. Alternatives include polling to assess understanding, work submitted by groups, or individual quizzes administered within the LMS ( 4 ). Appendix 2 provides additional suggestions for summative assessment and comments on technology issues. While the epilepsy study required group submissions of the entire case once completed, other cases that we have implemented have incorporated a variety of options to assess the learning goals.

Federal guidelines suggest two to three hours of student work for every hour in class ( 18 ). Online case study teaching can follow these guidelines with two to three hours combined preparation and follow-up for each synchronous hour (and the equivalent summed hours for asynchronous online teaching). The epilepsy case involved one hour of independent, asynchronous preparation, one hour of synchronous group work with the professor present, and one hour of asynchronous group work to wrap up.

Our classrooms may look different in the era of physical distancing and stressed bandwidth, but we can still enhance student learning and reinforce course content using case studies. By following the three-step approach ( Fig. 1 ), we encourage students to progress from lower to higher levels within Bloom’s taxonomy of learning and also provide multiple assessment opportunities. Students (i) achieve foundational knowledge through individual student preparation (remember and understand); (ii) tackle activities collaboratively following specific roles and responsibilities (understand, apply, analyze); and (iii) synthesize new conceptual understanding (analyze, evaluate, create). Together, these tips and resources provide a framework for the use of case studies to promote active student learning through both individual and group work regardless of course modality.

SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS

Appendix 1: additional resources, appendix 2: summative assessment and technology issues, acknowledgments.

We appreciate the patience, energy, and wonderful ideas students provided. We the authors are Case Fellows as part of the High-throughput Discovery Science & Inquiry-based Case Studies for Today’s Students (HITS). The case study described here is one of many created through the NSF HITS RCN network (NSF award 1730317). Our goal is to raise awareness of the use of high-throughput approaches and datasets using case study pedagogies. We have no conflicts of interest to declare.

† Supplemental materials available at http://asmscience.org/jmbe

• Research article
• Open access
• Published: 31 January 2023

Student-centered case-based teaching and online–offline case discussion in postgraduate courses of computer science

• Xinhong Zhang 1 ,
• Boyan Zhang 1 &
• Fan Zhang   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2176-3835 2  

International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education volume  20 , Article number:  6 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

7178 Accesses

15 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

This study explores a student-centered teaching method in postgraduate courses. Teacher-centered classroom teaching cannot fully stimulate learning initiative and enthusiasm of students. Student-centered means that students actively learn and construct knowledge by participating in teaching activities. This study presents a student-centered online–offline hybrid teaching method, which adopts student-centered case-based teaching and online–offline case discussion in the postgraduate courses of computer science. The latest engineering cases are integrated into teaching and a case library is constructed. Taking the digital image processing course as an example, student-centered teaching allows students to choose what to learn and how to learn. Case-based teaching makes students better understand the application of theory of knowledge. It can introduce multiple perspectives, promote understanding and reflection on problems, and help students develop higher-level thinking, analysis, and synthesis skills. This study explores online–offline case discussion method in the student-centered teaching and proposes the principles of case design of postgraduate courses. Revised Bloom’s taxonomy is used for teaching assessment. The actual teaching effect shows that student-centered case-based teaching and online–offline case discussion have achieved better teaching effect.

Introduction

Teacher-centered classroom teaching is the main mode adopted in current postgraduate courses of computer science. However, this traditional teaching mode cannot fully stimulate the learning initiative and enthusiasm of students, and is also not conducive to cultivating their innovative thinking ability. We find it difficult to achieve the teaching goal by completely adopting teacher-centered classroom teaching for science and engineering graduate students, because their studies focus more on engineering and practical applications. So, it is necessary to explore a new teaching mode. Case-based teaching (CBT) or case-based learning (CBL) provides a solution to solve the problems above (Sangam et al.,  2021 ).

In case-based teaching, a case is defined as a description based on a real event or situation in which sufficient detail is provided to assist students in the analysis and solution of problems (Prada et al.,  2020 ; Tan et al.,  2014 ). The development of information technology has created a variety of possibilities for the design of cases. Therefore, cases are also defined as the typical teaching events using multimedia formats, such as video, audio, pictures, animation, and web pages. The case-based teaching method guides students to carry out a series of learning activities, including analysis, discussion, problem-solving, evaluation, reflection etc., which is helpful for students to develop higher-level thinking, analytical and integrative skills (Tawfik et al.,  2017 ; Strobel et al.,  2013 ). Some studies have shown that case-based teaching makes up for the deficiency of passive acceptance of learning, and has a significant impact on promoting knowledge transfer and knowledge application.

This paper presents a student-centered online–offline hybrid teaching method for the postgraduate courses of computer science, which adopts case-based teaching and online–offline case discussion. The latest engineering cases are integrated into teaching and a case library is constructed. Taking the digital image processing course as an example, student-centered teaching allows students to choose what to learn and how to learn. Case-based teaching makes students better understand the application of theory. It can introduce multiple perspectives, promote understanding and reflection on problems, and help students develop higher-level thinking, analysis, and synthesis skills. Revised Bloom’s taxonomy is used for teaching assessment.

The main contributions of this study are as follows:

Exploring student-centered teaching in postgraduate courses.

Using cases as the main contents of teaching.

Adopting the case-based teaching method.

Exploring the online–offline case discussions in the student-centered teaching.

Proposing the principles of case design of postgraduate courses.

This paper is organized as follows: " Introduction " section deals with the introduction. " Literature review " section reviews the relevant literature. " Methods " section describes the method of case library construction and the method of student-centered case-based teaching. " Result " section provides the implementation results of our teaching method. " Discussion " section discusses this study. Finally, " Conclusion " section draws conclusion.

Literature review

Case-based teaching

The design and implementation of case-based teaching activities create opportunities for an exploratory new learning mode (Goeze et al.,  2014 ). By participating in a series of activities in case-based teaching, students actively develop skills of knowledge application and problem-solving, and conduct abilities of higher-level thinking, analysis and synthesis (Newton et al.,  2015b ). Several studies have highlighted how case-based teaching enhances students’ comprehension and critical thinking skills (Leon et al.,  2015 ). Students’ reflective and critical thinking skills are promoted as they work on cases that challenge them to deal with issues of multiple layers and complex dimensions.

With the development of information technology, the cases used for teaching have been transformed from the textual narration to the multimedia-based presentation. Multimedia cases are gradually applied to the online learning environment (Luo et al.,  2018 ). Multimedia case teaching has its unique advantages. It can better simulate the complexity of real-world problems (Rico & Ertmer,  2015 ). For example, the cases presented by interactive multimedia can attract and motivate students, and can effectively promote knowledge transfer. Hewitt et al. use video cases as the carrier of case-based teaching. They encourage students to think, discuss, solve, and reflect the problem through pause and interaction of the video case at each key point. The final results prove that video case teaching promotes the learning interest and motivation of students (Hewitt et al.,  2003 ). In the exploration of learning effects, Choi et al. use the interaction and feedback functions of multimedia cases to provide feedbacks of experts at each decision point of case problems. During the case learning process, students can view expert opinions to gain an in-depth understanding of the problem. The results of the learning effect evaluation demonstrate the effectiveness of multimedia case teaching (Choi & Lee,  2008 ). Research results show that multimedia case teaching improves learning motivation of students, helps students better master knowledge, and improves their problem-solving ability. Yoon et al. use learning analytics to gain useful insights into student learning in a video-based online learning environment (Yoon et al.,  2021 ). Based on the observed patterns of log behavior, students can be divided into two categories: active learners and passive learners. Aactive learners have higher academic performance than passive learners.

When constructing teaching cases, teachers should start by identifying goals, identifying skills, and deciding which concepts students should learn. Through this process, teachers carefully consider the learning outcomes that students should achieve (Jevne et al.,  2021 ). Newton et al. argue that case production can be either open-ended or guided by challenges or problems, depending on the teaching purpose and student population. The case should enhance students’ interest by using stories they can relate to (Newton et al.,  2015a ).

Case discussion

Case discussion is an important part of case-based teaching. It is regarded as the key to the success of case-based teaching. Teachers guide students to express their personal opinions on the case, and realize the sharing process of problem exploration and knowledge construction (Ertmer & Koehler,  2014 ). Some studies have shown that case discussions can introduce a variety of viewpoints, promote students’ understanding and reflection on problems, and help students transfer and apply knowledge. In general, case discussion has a good role in promoting case-based teaching (Ertmer & Koehler,  2015 ). Yew et al. believe that students’ participation in the interactive case activities can help students to actively construct knowledge, improve learning interest and learning engagement, and enhance learning performance (Yew & Yong,  2014 ). The targeted guidance of teachers also improves the learning experience and learning effect (Long & Koehler,  2021 ; Kim,  2022 ; Roels et al.,  2021 ; Zhang et al.,  2019 , 2022a ). Lock et al. provide expert understandings of online discussions. These understandings address real-world issues related to diverse and digital classrooms (Lock & Redmond,  2021 ). Zhang et al. use epistemic network analysis (ENA) to explore the collaborative problem-solving processes of students and teachers in different online collaborative learning tasks (Zhang et al.,  2022b ). By investigating the academic performance of collaborative problem-solving patterns, they reveal in detail the relationship between cooperative problem-solving and students’ academic performance.

The online learning environment presents both opportunities and challenges for case discussions (Mcpartlan et al.,  2021 ). Broadbent et al. evaluate whether self-regulated learning (SRL) impacts with students’ academic performance in both online and offline learning environments (Broadbent et al.,  2021 ). Among students who study online, those who benefit the most are those who are confident, able to manage their time and discipline their efforts. Turk et al. believe that online course instructors should provide self-supporting goals, choices, guidance, and feedbacks. They should also ensure their effective interactions with students. The interactive learning environment for students to interact with their peers should be socially and emotionally trusting (Turk et al.,  2022 ).

As an important activity of the case-based teaching method, online discussions create conditions for online teaching or online–offline hybrid teaching. online–offline hybrid teaching is a kind of teaching that combines online teaching with traditional teaching (Zhao et al.,  2022 ; Yi,  2022 ; Peng & Wei,  2021 ). online–offline hybrid case discussion has special advantages. (1) online–offline hybrid case discussion breaks the limitation of time and space. It realizes a more flexible and free way of asynchronous discussion. Online case discussion prolongs the timeliness of classroom discussion and provides students with a more personalized learning pace, more flexible problem-solving and reflection space. (2) online–offline hybrid case discussion creates more favorable conditions for the participation of teachers and invited experts. Flexible online and offline interaction helps teachers to provide more accurate guidance and feedback, which makes it possible for highly interactive case teaching. However, the asynchronous discussion makes the problem discussion lose the characteristics of timely feedback, and the online discussion weakens the guiding role of teachers to a certain extent (Wu,  2022 ; Li et al.,  2021 ).

• Student-centered teaching

The student-centered teaching concept reflects the principles of constructivism theory. Student-centered means that students actively learn and construct knowledge by participating in teaching activities (Zhienbayeva & Abdigapbarova,  2021 ; Mamnpoba,  2021 ). In student-centered teaching, the teaching method changes from teaching to guiding; The teaching subject changes from teacher to student; The teaching content changes from textbook to practice; The assessment method changes from traditional examinations to diversified procedural examinations. Student-centered teaching is closely related to students’ learning enthusiasm. Specifically, student-centered teaching can help students actively participate in learning and achieve better grades. When students’ needs are more comprehensively met, student attendance will increase, and the possibility of dropping out will be reduced. They will focus more on their studies and be better prepared for graduation. Constantinou et al. point out that student-centered teaching involves not only academic learning, but also other skills, such as active participation in society or community, professionalism, mental health, etc. Therefore, student-centered teaching requires a holistic view of the learning and development of students (Constantinou,  2020 ). The corona virus 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic has forced higher education to transform to the online learning mode. This provides an opportunity to adopt student-centered teaching. Active learning can improve students’ performance and close the achievement gaps for underachievers (Sandrone et al.,  2021 ). Angel et al. adopt the method of flipped classroom to carry out student-centered teaching (Mingorance Estrada et al.,  2019 ). Compared with the traditional teaching, this method significantly improves student performance, increases student interaction, and improves classroom attendance and engagement. Teachers’ feedback and teacher-student interaction will effectively mobilize students’ learning enthusiasm. Moges et al. believe that in order to improve the teaching effect, teachers should innovate and diversify teaching methods to attract students to participate. In addition, teachers and students need to be properly trained. Both of them need to understand the impact of student-centered education so that they have a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities (Moges,  2019 ).

Both the teacher-centered teaching method and the student-centered teaching method are useful. The best teaching method is comprehensive. Different teaching methods can learn from each other and complement each other. Several studies have revealed the value of combining traditional teaching with student-centered teaching. A way of combined approach is for students to try to solve problems on their own. The teacher then teaches the correct problem-solving steps and compares the student’s solution to a standard problem-solving solution. This model can be called learning before teaching. Exploratory learning is a teaching method of learning before teaching. Exploratory learning refers to the exploration of new problems by students before they are taught related concepts and solutions (Chung & Ho,  2021 ). The purpose of exploratory learning is to give students the opportunity to explore new topics for themselves before accepting traditional teaching (Weaver et al.,  2018 ; Schalk et al.,  2017 ). Another way of combining application is to teach the relevant knowledge and correct solution directly, and then ask the students to do problem-solving exercises using the method taught by the teacher. This model can be called teaching before learning. The most typical example of teaching before learning is problem-based learning (PBL). PBL is a teaching method that students are presented with a real or realistic problem, such as a case, and use inductive reasoning to learn both information about the topic and how to think critically about it. Through PBL, students can acquire both knowledge and skills of collaboration, communication, and reflection (Kapur,  2016 ; Armstrong et al.,  2021 ).

Self-regulated learning and Bloom’s taxonomy

Self-regulated learning (SRL) refers to the process by which students activate and maintain their own thoughts, feelings and behaviors, and systematically achieve learning goals (Song et al.,  2021 ; Tran et al.,  2022 ). Learning goal, efficacy and learning strategy are three important components of self-regulated learning (Granberg et al.,  2021 ). The most striking feature of self-regulated learning is that students have actual control over their own learning. They can cognitive and control the processes directly to achieve their learning goals (Callan et al.,  2021 ; Guo et al.,  2021a ; Tuti et al.,  2021 ). Rovers et al. compare the validity of several different methods of self-regulated learning (Rovers et al.,  2019 ). The self-reported questionnaire can reflect the overall level of students’ self-regulated learning. In contrast, behavioral measures provide more accurate explanations when students are asked to report specific self-regulated learning strategies. Many studies have shown that the external feedback from teachers could promote students’ self-regulated learning (Yunus et al.,  2021 ; Aguilar et al.,  2021 ). Teacher’s feedback and evaluation could increase the intrinsic motivation of students. For example, encouraging students to participate in more challenging tasks can improve the self-regulated learning level of students. Students typically exhibit more academic help-seeking behavior and make more efforts in response to teachers’ support (Guo et al.,  2021b ).

Bloom’s taxonomy is a hierarchical model that divides learning into levels of complexity. The revised Bloom’s taxonomy divides the cognitive process dimensions in six levels (Krathwohl,  2002 ). The six levels from low to high are: Remember, Understand, Apply, Analyze, Evaluate, and Create. Figure  1 shows the revised Bloom’s taxonomy. Bloom’s taxonomy is a hierarchical model designating learning into levels of complexity and is often used to structure course experiences such as learning objectives, assessments, and pedagogical choices (Killion et al.,  2022 ). Bloom’s taxonomy of educational goals reflects the relationship between knowledge learning and ability development through the structure of knowledge dimension and cognitive process dimension. It is also a tool for the evaluation of teaching objectives and the assessment of examinations (Vieyra & Gonzlez,  2020 ). Desha et al. propose a new model to assess the development of problem-solving skills based on Bloom’s taxonomy (Desha et al.,  2021 ). They wonder how the design might have stimulated or dampened student appreciation of complexity, and how these findings aligned with desired expectations. To explore this, the learning materials are evaluated through Bloom’s taxonomy. The goal is to understand the extent to which the course content exposed students to the spectrum of problem-solving contexts. Dolan et al. propose some recommendations for the use of virtual simulations in the current learning environment by studying learning theories, learning styles, and Bloom’s revised taxonomy (Dolan et al.,  2021 ). Synchronous debriefing with students, faculty, preceptors, and peers provides the opportunity for scaffolding to support students’ learning needs and foster reflection.

The revised Bloom’s taxonomy

Construction of a case library for the digital image processing course

Digital image processing is a course for computer science graduate students. This course is both theoretical and practical. At present, the cases in the teaching materials are relatively outdated and cannot reflect the latest research progress. In addition, because there is no experiment arranged, students’ sense of participation is not strong. This paper explores the method of student-centered case-based teaching and online–offline case discussion during digital image processing.

The construction objectives of the case library (or case base) of digital image processing course are as follows. The design of case library is student-centered. The information and data in the case should fully consider correctness and reliability. Case library requires constant maintenance and updating. Cases should meet the requirements of typicality, objectivity, advancement, and innovation. Students can acquire the knowledge of image processing efficiently and quickly from cases. Through case-based teaching, students should be able to broaden their horizons, stimulate their learning interest and improve their practical abilities.

Principles of case design

We propose the following principles of case design for the engineering courses:

Comprehensiveness. Multiple knowledge points are run through case-based teaching. Knowledge points are presented to students in the form of interconnected case applications. Students can discover and master knowledge in the practice process of problem-solving. Therefore, it is necessary to ensure comprehensive requirements in case design, so that the designed cases can be seamlessly connected with the knowledge points of the textbooks.

Advanced. The latest research results are collated into teaching cases to replace the outdated cases of the textbooks. The teaching case should be advanced and innovative. For example, choosing teaching cases using artificial intelligence (AI) and other new technologies can make up for the insufficient introduction of new knowledge and new technologies in the textbooks.

Engineering. The practical engineering problems are transformed into teaching cases to reflect the practicability of the digital image processing course. For example, we invite engineering experts from partner companies to write cases together. These cases place more emphasis on the combination of theory and practice.

Case design and selection

The design and selection of cases should give students a solid understanding of the application and implementation of theories, methods, and models. Well-designed cases can guide students to discover, analyze, and solve problems. Cases should involve all the knowledge points and their applications of each chapter of the digital image processing course.

Digital image processing has been widely used in many fields. The applications of digital image processing are interconnected with many disciplines, such as mathematics, physics, biology, medicine, and computer science. At the same time, it is supported by many new theories, new tools, and new technologies. Artificial intelligence (AI) is the main application field of digital image processing. The digital image processing course intersects with many courses, such as pattern recognition, machine vision, computer graphics and other courses. Therefore, the design and selection of cases should avoid being limited to the knowledge points of a digital image processing course, but should try to reflect interdisciplinary characteristics and interdisciplinary integration. Figure  2 shows the relationship between a digital image processing course and other disciplines or courses.

The relationship between a digital image processing course and other disciplines or courses

According to the case design principles mentioned above, we designed and selected some teaching cases for the digital image processing course. In order to facilitate students’ extracurricular study and online–offline discussions, we provide the case study documents for each case. The contents of case study documents include preparatory knowledge, theoretical knowledge, technical points, implementation process, results, and demonstration programs. Source codes are also provided in most of the cases. Case study documents are distributed online for students to study and practice after class. Some of the case study documents of the digital image processing course are shown in Table  1 .

Arrangements of student-centered case-based teaching

Our student-centered case-based teaching process adopts an online–offline hybrid approach. The teaching arrangement includes theoretical knowledge lectures (offline), case introduction (offline or online), extracurricular literature reading, extracurricular experiments, and group discussions (online or offline).

Lectures on theoretical knowledge

Classroom teaching is used to describe the knowledge background and the application fields of cases. Problems are elicited through cases, and theoretical concepts and knowledge points related to cases are explained. In the teaching of theoretical knowledge, we only teach selected contents of the textbook to save the limited classroom teaching time. The rest of the contents are left to students for self-study and discussion.

Introduction of cases

When and how to introduce cases is also considered. According to the teaching plan, we determine which cases are introduced in which chapters, how each case is presented, and how long it takes to explain or demonstrate the case. The introduction of cases not only enables students to better understand the practical application of theoretical knowledge, but also enables these cases to effectively support the relevant knowledge points in the textbook.

Extracurricular literature reading and extracurricular experiments

We arrange for students to consult the literature on the content of theoretical knowledge of the introduced cases. Students should run the source codes provided by case after class and improve it, or design new codes according to the requirements of the case and the theoretical knowledge they have learned. They need to implement the codes themselves to achieve the required functions of the case.

online–offline discussion

online–offline group discussions are conducted on the theoretical knowledge lectures, introduced cases, and experimental results. We encourage students to ask questions and encourage their sense of innovation. When necessary, we also arrange for oral presentations by group representatives.

Implementations of student-centered case-based teaching

The case-based teaching process is designed as student-centered. The main teaching content is cases and textbooks. The implementations of student-centered case-based teaching for digital image processing course is shown in Fig.  3 .

The implementations of student-centered case-based teaching for the digital image processing course

Providing case documents online and arranging students to preview before class.

Introducing the background and objectives of the case in traditional classroom teaching mode, and teaching relevant knowledge and theories. Classroom group discussions are arranged during this process.

Guiding students to explore cases in online and offline hybrid teaching mode. Students learn relevant theories and methods through case studies. Students are encouraged to come up with their own solutions based on the theories and methods they have learned. This is a learning-imitation-exploration-innovation process (innovation is optional). Online and offline discussions are arranged during this process.

Students implement extracurricular experiments based on the source codes provided by the case or design new codes by themselves. The analysis of the experimental results also needs to be done themselves. They can communicate about the problems they encountered, seek help, or discuss solutions of problems and experimental results through online or offline discussions.

Introducing, sharing, and demonstrating the learning results of the case in online or classroom teaching mode. Finally, we organize exams and evaluate the exam results.

Assessment methods

The revised Bloom’s taxonomy is used for teaching objective evaluation and examination assessment. After the introduction of the case-based teaching mode, the assessment method also needs to be adjusted accordingly. We no longer only use the static indicators, such as exam scores, but introduce the dynamic indicators for the assessments, such as case study reports, experiment reports, literature reading reports, oral reports, and records of participation in online–offline group discussions. These assessments consider the characteristics of case-based teaching and realize individualized evaluation.

Research object

This research is based on the digital image processing course for graduate students of computer science. Full-time postgraduate students of three consecutive years participated in this research. Since the number of graduate students varies from year to year, we randomly selected 100 students from each year as one group. All the students in the three groups are to study the digital image processing course for the first time, and they had never learned any cases used in this research before. The three groups of students are roughly equivalent in gender ratio, age distribution, and course-related prior knowledge. In addition, when the questionnaire of learning interest and learning motivation were scored, the feedbacks of the three groups of students are not significantly different. Which indicates that they have similar learning interests and learning motivations.

Different teaching methods, teaching contents, and assessment methods were adopted to the three groups of students. The differences between them are shown in Table  2 .

Student-centered case-based learning

The case-based teaching process is designed as student-centered. After the traditional classroom teaching for the introduction of the cases background and objectives, and the online–offline hybrid teaching for the study of relevant theories and methods, students are encouraged to propose their own solutions based on the theories and methods they have learned. Students can design and implement personalized solutions, and in the process, further learn and understand the theories and methods they want to use.

Example of a case: Text recognition of images.

Some X-ray images of welding seam inspection are provided. The goal of this case is to identify all the text on the X-ray images. This is a case with practical engineering needs.

According to the procedure of non-destructive testing (NDT), operators (welding workers) place some leaden markers beside the welding seam. The leaden markers are photographed together with the welding seam. The leaden markers include image quality indicator, positioning markers (center markers, overlap markers) and other identification markers. These identification markers can display the project number, pipe number, welding seam number, welding worker’s ID, welding date, etc.

The welding seam films will be scanned as high-quality digital images by using an industrial X-ray film digitizer. A scanned example image is shown in Fig.  4 . The resolution of scanned image is \(4242\times 882\times 3\) , and the image format is TIFF.

The scanned X-ray imaging film

Usually, the solution of this case includes three main parts: image preprocessing, image segmentation, and text recognition. Each part can be implemented in many different methods or a combination of several methods. For example, the methods of image preprocessing include: contrast enhancement, binarization, histogram equalization, geometric transformation, gray level interpolation, noise removal and so on. The methods of image segmentation include: threshold-based segmentation methods (such as Otsu’s method), region-based segmentation methods, and edge-based segmentation methods. In addition, image segmentation may also involve other related technologies, such as Radon transform. The methods of text recognition include: the traditional machine learning methods, such as artificial neural network (ANN), support vector machine (SVM), etc., and the deep learning methods, such as deep convolutional neural network (DCNN), recurrent neural network (RNN), etc. Here, deep learning is the learning technology in the sense of artificial intelligence (AI) rather than the learning method in the sense of education.

In each part, students can choose one or more methods they want to learn and use according to their own learning ability and learning interest. After making their choice, they need to conduct an in-depth study of these methods. They can download the source codes or write their own codes to implement these methods. Finally, the three parts of the codes are combined to generate their own personalized solution. Because the methods that students choose to learn and use are not the same, the combination of these methods results in a variety of personalized solutions. These solutions need to be tested and evaluated experimentally. Students can communicate any issues they encounter and share their learning experiences through online and offline case discussions. In this process, we encourage students to innovate their own methods or adopt novel ways of combining methods. For this case, the student-centered case-based teaching process is shown in Fig.  5 .

An example (text recognition of images) of the student-centered case-based teaching process

Learning behavior comparison

We compared the learning behaviors of Group B and Group C (Group A was the traditional teaching model without providing new cases). Group B adopted extracurricular self-regulated case learning mode. Group C adopted the student-centered case-based teaching and online–offline case discussion mode. According to the statistics, the times of online–offline discussions, the time of discussion, the times of asking questions, and the times of answering questions of Group C students was much larger than that of Group C students. The number of completed cases and the implement quality of cases of Group C students was better than that of Group C students. A radar chart of learning behavior comparison is shown as Fig.  6 . The comparison of the two groups of students’ learning behavior shows that the student-centered case-based teaching and online–offline case discussion teaching mode could indeed improve the students’ learning interest and initiative.

Radar chart of learning behavior comparison

Assessments

In the teaching of Group A, Group B and Group C, Groups A and B adopted the traditional teaching mode. The teaching of Group A did not involve new cases. Students of Group B were provided with case study documents and were arranged for extracurricular self-regulated case learning. Group C adopted the student-centered case-based teaching mode. The assessment methods of three groups were also different. Both Group A and Group B used the traditional examination method. Although students of Group B were arranged to study the case by themselves, the examination contents of Group B did not involve these cases. The assessment methods of Group C included traditional examination, case study reports, experiment reports, etc. In Group B, because the cases are self-regulated learned and the exam did not involve cases, many students did not put a lot of effort into the case study. The examination scores of Group B only improved slightly compared to Group A. The student-centered case-based teaching mode adopted by Group C greatly stimulated students’ learning interest, and their examination scores improved significantly. The comparison results show that the examination scores of Group C are significantly better than those of Group A and Group B. The comparison of the examination scores of the three groups is shown in Fig.  6 .

Comparison of examination scores of the three groups

Bloom’s taxonomy can be used as a tool for objective evaluation and examination assessment. It reflects the relationship between knowledge learning and ability development. In the assessments of Group C, we assigned six weights for each examination question according to the revised Bloom’s taxonomy in six aspects: Remember, Understand, Apply, Analyze, Evaluate, and Create. Table  3 is an example of student-centered case-based teaching and online–offline case discussion applying the revised Bloom’s taxonomy. Each cognitive skill corresponds to a specific teaching objective, and these teaching objectives are reflected in the specific test questions.

We conducted a comparison of the examination performance of students in Group A and Group C according to the revised Bloom’s taxonomy. The test data of the two groups approximately obey the normal distribution and meet the requirement of parameter test. The joint hypotheses test ( F -test) is used to analyze whether there are significant differences in the knowledge and ability levels of the two groups of students. The F -test results are shown in Table  4 , where MS represents mean squares, df represents degrees of freedom. Degrees of freedom refers to the number of variables that can be evaluated without restriction when calculating a uniform measure. F -value (or F -statistic) is the test statistic. P -value is the observed significance level. F crit represents the F -critical value, which is a specific value that F -value is compared with. It can be seen from Table  4 that, for Remember, Analyze, and Evaluate, their F -values are less than F crit and P -values are higher than 0.05. This indicates that there is no significant difference between the two groups in these three aspects. For Understand, Apply, and Create, their F -values are greater than F crit and P -value are less than 0.01. This indicates that the two groups of data have very significant differences in these three aspects. The F -test results show that, in three aspects of Understand, Apply, and Create, our teaching method has a very significant improvement over the traditional teaching method.

These results can be interpreted as follows. Traditional classroom teaching methods emphasize memorization of basic theories and concepts, based on which students can use these insights to solve problems and pass exams. Therefore, students are fully trained in the three cognitive skills of Remember, Analyze, and Evaluate. In these three aspects, its learning effect is no less than the student-centered case teaching. However, due to the lack of specific application training, traditional classroom teaching methods do not allow students to understand the basic concepts more deeply. Students’ ability of association and innovation has not been fully trained. This is reflected in students’ difficulty in applying what they have learned to solve complex engineering problems.

Student-centered case-based teaching and online–offline case discussion provide students with an environment and opportunity to carry out specific application training, which help students actively explore and understand basic concepts, and apply the knowledge learned to practical engineering problems. Compared with the traditional classroom teaching mode, student-centered case-based teaching mode can improve students’ enthusiasm and initiative in learning, and improve their ability to solve complex engineering problems. This is reflected in the improvement of three cognitive skills: Understand, Apply, and Create.

Digital image processing is a highly theoretical and practical course. When using the case-based teaching method, the physical concepts and meanings behind mathematical formulas should be emphasized in classroom teaching, and the methods and principles should be explained thoroughly. We try to let students truly grasp the theoretical principles and understand engineering applications through the introduction of engineering cases. The main characteristics of our student-centered case-based teaching are as follows.

Using cases as the main content of teaching

At present, the digital image processing teaching materials used in this course cannot fully meet the needs of postgraduate teaching, and we do not find a better alternative textbook. Therefore, changing the main teaching content from textbook to cases is a solution. In our student-centered case-based teaching, cases are the main content of teaching. This method stimulates learning interest of students. Students can deepen their understanding of knowledge in the process of solving engineering problems.

Adopting a case-based teaching method

Knowledge points of the textbook are guided by the needs of engineering applications. The knowledge points are presented to students in the way of interconnected applications, so that students can discover and master knowledge in the practice process of solving-problems.

Student-centered teaching design

Through case-based teaching, the student-centered teaching design is truly realized. The student-centered learning approach not only allows students to choose what to learn, but also to choose how to learn.

Online and offline case discussions

Case discussion promotes knowledge construction through the process of shared exploration. Case discussion is the key to the success of case-based teaching. In the teaching method we designed, the case discussions can be transferred to online, and the real-time synchronous discussions can be transferred to the online asynchronous discussions.

Compared with the traditional teaching mode, the student-centered case-based teaching and online–offline case discussions proposed in this paper have achieved the following improvements in the teaching of postgraduate courses of computer science.

Students have a deeper and better understanding of the digital image processing course. The case-based learning model enables personalized learning by using offline-online hybrid approaches, supported by expanded learning options and multiple case resources (Jevne et al.,  2021 ; Yoon et al.,  2021 ). Through case-based teaching, they have fully realized the importance and practicability of this course.

Through the student-centered case-based teaching method, the boring knowledge teaching is replaced by the flexible and diverse case teaching, which arouses learning enthusiasm and interest of students. The study found that students can organize their learning process, and students’ time management flexibility and flexibility content are quite high, which were stated in the literature (Endedijk et al.,  2016 ; Turan et al.,  2022 ).

Teaching effect is improved. Students’ theoretical level, practical level, ability of analyze and solve problems, innovative thinking mode and literature reading level are improved to a certain extent. This result can be confirmed by the comparison of examination scores of the three groups (Fig.  7 ) and the learning behavior comparison of the two groups (Fig.  6 ). Empirical studies on how students learn, including brain development, motivation, creativity, perseverance, self-regulation, knowledge application, etc., also confirm the effectiveness of student-centered learning approaches (Goodell & Thai,  2020 ).

Students’ horizons are broadened. Students can understand the knowledge structure and problem-solving methods of different disciplines and courses, and fully realize the advantages of interdisciplinary learning. In case-based learning, there is a need to relate prior knowledge within and between disciplines to external lived experiences. In the process, students are trained in critical thinking, creative thinking, and problem-solving skills and strategies (Jung,  2013 ).

Teaching level of teachers is improved. After the introduction of the student-centered case-based teaching method, the teaching process is no longer completely based on textbooks. Teachers need to think more about the selection and design of cases. This process deepens teachers’ understanding of the curriculum and improves teachers’ knowledge structure. Student-centered case-based teaching can help teachers update teaching concepts, improve teaching methods, and continuously improve teaching levels in subsequent teaching. In student-centered teaching, teachers need to solve problems in communication between students and teachers so that students can receive correct feedback when they need it. Therefore, the teaching management ability of teachers has also been improved (Yan et al.,  2021 ).

Graduate students of science and engineering usually focus on engineering applications and practices. It is difficult to achieve teaching goals by completely adopting teacher-centered classroom teaching. Case-based teaching can greatly improve the teaching effect. By constructing a case library and integrating the latest engineering cases into teaching, students can better understand the practical application of theoretical knowledge, and generate strong interest in learning and research. We practice the student-centered case-based teaching and online–offline case discussion in a digital image processing course for graduate students in computer science, and propose an actionable case-based teaching scheme. Case-based teaching is a systematic project. In addition to the construction of a case library and the introduction of cases in teaching, it also involves a series of problems, such as the adjustment of teaching plans and the changes of assessment methods. There are still many aspects of case-based teaching that need to be explored and perfected. Through the verification of actual teaching, the student-centered case-based teaching can stimulate learning enthusiasm and interest of students, and help them to cultivate innovative thinking modes and practical abilities. The joint hypotheses test is used to analyze whether there are significant differences in the knowledge and ability levels of students in different learning modes. The F -test results show that, in three aspects (Understand, Apply, and Create), our teaching method shows a very significant improvement over the traditional teaching method.

Availability of data and materials

The data of this study is not open to the public due to participant privacy.

Abbreviations

• Case-based learning

Epistemic network analysis

Self-regulated learning

Coronavirus disease 2019

Pproblem based learning

Artificial intelligence

Non-destructive testing

Aartificial neural network

Support vector machine

Deep convolutional neural network

Recurrent neural network

Aguilar, S. J., Karabenick, S. A., Teasley, S. D., & Baek, C. (2021). Associations between learning analytics dashboard exposure and motivation and self-regulated learning. Computers & Education, 162 , 104085.

Article   Google Scholar  

Armstrong, D., Murck, B., & Poe, J. C. (2021). Service learning opportunity for undergraduate science students: Integrating problem-based learning in the high school science curriculum. Journal of Chemical Education, 98 (4), 1275–1282.

Broadbent, J., Sharman, S., Panadero, E., & Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M. (2021). How does self-regulated learning influence formative assessment and summative grade? Comparing online and blended learners. The Internet and Higher Education, 50 (4), 100805.

Callan, G. L., Rubenstein, D. V., Ridgley, L. M., Neumeister, K. S., Finch, M. H., & Longhurst, D. (2021). Measuring and predicting divergent thinking with a self-report questionnaire, teacher rating scale, and self-regulated learning microanalysis. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 39 (5), 549–562.

Choi, I., & Lee, K. (2008). Designing and implementing a case-based learning environment for enhancing ill-structured problem solving: Classroom management problems for prospective teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57 , 99–129.

Chung, H., & Ho, M. (2021). International competitive strategies, organizational learning and export performance: A match and mismatch conceptualization. European Journal of Marketing, 55, 2794–2822.

Constantinou, C. (2020). A reflexive goal framework for achieving student-centered learning in European higher education: From class learning to community engagement. Societies, 10, 1–11.

Desha, C., Caldera, S., & Hutchinson, D. (2021). Exploring the development of context appreciation in coursework that targets problem-solving for sustainable development. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 22 (5), 1186–1224.

Dolan, H., Amidon, B., & Gephart, S. (2021). Evidentiary and theoretical foundations for virtual simulation in nursing education. Journal of Professional Nursing, 37 , 810–815.

Endedijk, M., Brekelmans, M., Sleegers, P., & Vermunt, J. D. (2016). Measuring students’ self-regulated learning in professional education: Bridging the gap between event and aptitude measurements. Quality & Quantity, 50, 2141–2164.

Ertmer, P., & Koehler, A. (2014). Online case-based discussions: Examining coverage of the afforded problem space. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62, 617–636.

Ertmer, P., & Koehler, A. (2015). Facilitated versus non-facilitated online case discussions: Comparing differences in problem space coverage. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 27, 69–93.

Goeze, A., Zottmann, J., Vogel, F., Fischer, F., & Schrader, J. (2014). Getting immersed in teacher and student perspectives? Facilitating analytical competence using video cases in teacher education. Instructional Science, 42, 91–114.

Goodell, J., & Thai, K. (2020). A learning engineering model for learner-centered adaptive systems. vol 12425, pp 557–573. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60128-7_41 .

Granberg, C., Palm, T., & Palmberg, B. (2021). A case study of a formative assessment practice and the effects on students’ self-regulated learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 68 (3), 100955.

Guo, H., Tong, F., Wang, Z., Tang, S., Yoon, M., Ying, M., & Yu, X. (2021a). Examining self-regulated learning strategy model: A measurement invariance analysis of mslq-cal among college students in china. Sustainability, 13 , 10133.

Guo, W., Bai, B., & Song, H. (2021b). Influences of process-based instruction on students’ use of self-regulated learning strategies in efl writing. System, 101 , 102578.

Hewitt, J., Pedretti, E., Bencze, L., Vaillancourt, B., & Yoon, S. (2003). New applications for multimedia cases: Promoting reflective practice in preservice teacher education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 11 , 483–500.

Google Scholar  

Jevne, K., Ulleberg, I., & Oien, I. (2021). Why and how? Case-based teaching in interprofessional and interdisciplinary education. Nordisk tidsskrift for utdanning og praksis, 15, 51–68.

Jung, S. (2013). Experiences in developing an experimental robotics course program for undergraduate education. IEEE Transactions on Education, 56 (1), 129–136.

Kapur, M. (2016). Examining productive failure, productive success, unproductive failure, and unproductive success in learning. Educational Psychologist, 51 , 1–11.

Killion, A. K., Michel, J. O., & Hawes, J. K. (2022). Toward identifying sustainability leadership competencies: Insights from mapping a graduate sustainability education curriculum. Sustainability, 14 , 1–18.

Kim, J. (2022). A case study on an online Korean discussion class with foreign undergraduate students. The Korean Association of General Education, 16, 167–178.

Krathwohl, D. (2002). A revision of bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41 (4), 212–218.

Leon, J., Winskell, K., Mcfarland, D., & Del Rio, C. (2015). A case-based, problem-based learning approach to prepare master of public health candidates for the complexities of global health. American Journal of Public Health, 105, S92–S96.

Li, J., Yao, Y., & Guo, Q. (2021). Online and offline hybrid teaching in the luminescent materials and applications course. Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 5 , 51–56.

Lock, J., & Redmond, P. (2021). Embedded experts in online collaborative learning: A case study. The Internet and Higher Education, 48 , 100773.

Long, Y., & Koehler, A. (2021). Student participation and interaction in online case-based discussions: Comparing expert and novice facilitation. Online Learning, 25 , 220–246.

Luo, H., Koszalka, T., Arnone, M., & Choi, I. (2018). Applying case-based method in designing self-directed online instruction: A formative research study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66, 515–544.

Mamnpoba, K. (2021). Principles and methods of student-centered learning (scl). Scientific Work, 69 , 16–19.

Mcpartlan, P., Rutherford, T., Rodriguez, F., Schaffer, J. F., & Holton, A. (2021). Modality motivation: Selection effects and motivational differences in students who choose to take courses online. The Internet and Higher Education, 49 (5), 100793.

Mingorance Estrada, A., Vera, G., Ruiz, R., & Arrebola, I. (2019). Flipped classroom to improve university student centered learning and academic performance. Social Sciences, 8 , 315.

Moges, B. (2019). Contemporary teaching-learning practices: Implementation and challenges of student-centered learning approach in higher education of Ethiopia. Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science, 32 (4), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.9734/jesbs/2019/v32i430181

Newton, C., Bainbridge, L., Ball, V., Baum, K. D., Bontje, P., Boyce, R. A., Moran, M., Richardson, B., Tamura, Y., Uden, D., Wagner, S. J., & Wood, V. (2015a). The health care team challenge: Developing an international interprofessional education research collaboration. Nurse Education Today, 35 (1), 4–8.

Newton, C., Bainbridge, L., Ball, V., Baum, K. D., & Wood, V. (2015b). The health care team challenge: Developing an international interprofessional education research collaboration. Nurse Education Today, 35 (1), 4–8.

Peng, X., & Wei, L. (2021). Exploration of online and offline hybrid teaching of pathophysiology. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 09 , 433–438.

Prada, M., Dominguez, M., Lopez Vicario, J., Alves, P., Barbu, M., Podpora, M., Spagnolini, U., Pereira, M., & Vilanova, R. (2020). Educational data mining for tutoring support in higher education: A web-based tool case study in engineering degrees. IEEE Access, 8 , 212818–212836.

Rico, R., & Ertmer, P. (2015). Examining the role of the instructor in problem-centered instruction. TechTrends, 59 , 96–103.

Roels, N., Ghidinelli, M., Cunningham, M., & Bilici, M. (2021). What are learner and instructor preferences for group size and composition for a series of synchronous online case discussions for upper extremity trauma surgeons? Journal of European CME, 10 , 1–10.

Rovers, S., Clarebout, G., Savelberg, H., de Bruin, A., & Van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2019). Granularity matters: Comparing different ways of measuring self-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning, 14, 1–19.

Sandrone, S., Scott, G., Anderson, W., & Musunuru, K. (2021). Active learning-based stem education for in-person and online learning. Cell, 184 , 1409–1414.

Sangam, M., Kalatharan, P., Bokan, G. V., Deka, R., & Kaur, A. (2021). Efficacy of case-based learning in anatomy. Cureus, 13 , e20472.

Schalk, L., Schumacher, R., Barth, A., & Stern, E. (2017). When problem-solving followed by instruction is superior to the traditional tell-and-practice sequence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110 (4), 596–610. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000234

Song, D., Hong, H., & Oh, E. Y. (2021). Applying computational analysis of novice learners’ computer programming patterns to reveal self-regulated learning, computational thinking, and learning performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 120 (6), 106746.

Strobel, J., Wang, J., Weber, N., & Dyehouse, M. (2013). The role of authenticity in design-based learning environments: The case of engineering education. Computers & Education, 64 , 143–152.

Tan, J., Guo, X., Zheng, W., & Zhong, M. (2014). Case-based teaching using the laboratory animal system for learning c/c++ programming. Computers & Education, 77 (Aug), 39–49.

Tawfik, A., Giabbanelli, P., Hogan, M., Msilu, F., Gill, A., & York, C. (2017). Effects of success v failure cases on learner-learner interaction. Computers & Education, 118 , 120–132.

Tran, H., Capps, D., & Hodges, G. (2022). Preservice science teachers’ perspectives on and practices related to self-regulated learning after a brief learning opportunity. Sustainability, 14 , 5923.

Turan, Z., Kucuk, S., & Karabey, S. C. (2022). The university students’ self-regulated effort, flexibility and satisfaction in distance education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19 (35), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00342-w

Turk, M., Heddy, B. C., & Danielson, R. W. (2022). Teaching and social presences supporting basic needs satisfaction in online learning environments: How can presences and basic needs happily meet online? Computers & Education, 180 , 104432.

Tuti, T., Paton, C., & Winters, N. (2021). The counterintuitive self-regulated learning behaviours of healthcare providers from low-income settings. Computers & Education, 166 (1), 104136.

Vieyra, G. Q., & Gonzlez, L. (2020). Learning objects in online education: A systemic approach. European Journal of Education, 3 , 1186–1224.

Weaver, J., Chastain, R., DeCaro, D., & DeCaro, M. (2018). Reverse the routine: Problem solving before instruction improves conceptual knowledge in undergraduate physics. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 52 , 36–47.

Wu, X. (2022). Cloud-based collaborative English online and offline hybrid teaching. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing, 2022, 1–11.

Yan, L., Whitelock-Wainwright, A., Guan, Q., Wen, G., Gasevic, D., & Chen, G. (2021). Students’ experience of online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: A province-wide survey study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52 (5), 2038–2057.

Yew, E., & Yong, J. (2014). Student perceptions of facilitators’ social congruence, use of expertise and cognitive congruence in problem-based learning. Instructional Science, 42 , 795–815.

Yi, M. (2022). Study on the effectiveness of online and offline hybrid teaching. International Journal of Computing and Information Technology, 1 , 50–53.

Yoon, M., Lee, J., & Jo, I. H. (2021). Video learning analytics: Investigating behavioral patterns and learner clusters in video-based online learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 50 (3), 100806.

Yunus, F. W., Bissett, M., Penkala, S., Kadar, M., & Liu, K. (2021). Self-regulated learning versus activity-based intervention to reduce challenging behaviors and enhance school-related function for children with autism spectrum disorders: A randomized controlled trial. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 114 , 103986.

Zhang, F., Li, Z., Zhang, B., Du, H., Wang, B., & Zhang, X. (2019). Multi-modal deep learning model for auxiliary diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Neurocomputing, 361, 185–195.

Zhang, F., Zhang, Y., Zhu, X., Chen, X., Du, H., & Zhang, X. (2022a). Preggan: A prognosis prediction model for breast cancer based on conditional generative adversarial networks. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, 224 , 107026.

Zhang, S., Gao, Q., Sun, M., Cai, Z., Li, H., Tang, Y., & Liu, Q. (2022b). Understanding student teachers’ collaborative problem solving: Insights from an epistemic network analysis (ena). Computers & Education, 183 , 104485.

Zhao, W., Tan, F., Huang, H., & Liang, S. (2022). The design and implementation of a medical parasitology teaching case database based on the online and offline hybrid teaching model. Department of Parasitology, 6 (3), 49–53.

Zhienbayeva, N., & Abdigapbarova, U. (2021). The mechanism of transformation of student-centered learning. Pedagogy and Psychology, 47 , 120–128.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

This research was supported by the Key scientific and technological project (222102310090) and the Postgraduate Education Reform and Quality Improvement Project (YJS2022AL098 and YJS2022JD26).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Software, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, China

Xinhong Zhang & Boyan Zhang

Henan Key Laboratory of Big Data Analysis and Processing, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

XZ: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Resources, Writing-original draft, Writing-original draft. BZ: Investigation, Data collection and analysis, Writing-original draft preparation. FZ: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing-review and editing, Supervision. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fan Zhang .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Zhang, X., Zhang, B. & Zhang, F. Student-centered case-based teaching and online–offline case discussion in postgraduate courses of computer science. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 20 , 6 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00374-2

Download citation

Received : 05 September 2022

Accepted : 21 November 2022

Published : 31 January 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00374-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• online–offline case discussion
• Postgraduate teaching

• Our Mission

Making Learning Relevant With Case Studies

The open-ended problems presented in case studies give students work that feels connected to their lives.

To prepare students for jobs that haven’t been created yet, we need to teach them how to be great problem solvers so that they’ll be ready for anything. One way to do this is by teaching content and skills using real-world case studies, a learning model that’s focused on reflection during the problem-solving process. It’s similar to project-based learning, but PBL is more focused on students creating a product.

Case studies have been used for years by businesses, law and medical schools, physicians on rounds, and artists critiquing work. Like other forms of problem-based learning, case studies can be accessible for every age group, both in one subject and in interdisciplinary work.

You can get started with case studies by tackling relatable questions like these with your students:

• How can we limit food waste in the cafeteria?
• How can we get our school to recycle and compost waste? (Or, if you want to be more complex, how can our school reduce its carbon footprint?)
• How can we improve school attendance?
• How can we reduce the number of people who get sick at school during cold and flu season?

Addressing questions like these leads students to identify topics they need to learn more about. In researching the first question, for example, students may see that they need to research food chains and nutrition. Students often ask, reasonably, why they need to learn something, or when they’ll use their knowledge in the future. Learning is most successful for students when the content and skills they’re studying are relevant, and case studies offer one way to create that sense of relevance.

Teaching With Case Studies

Ultimately, a case study is simply an interesting problem with many correct answers. What does case study work look like in classrooms? Teachers generally start by having students read the case or watch a video that summarizes the case. Students then work in small groups or individually to solve the case study. Teachers set milestones defining what students should accomplish to help them manage their time.

During the case study learning process, student assessment of learning should be focused on reflection. Arthur L. Costa and Bena Kallick’s Learning and Leading With Habits of Mind gives several examples of what this reflection can look like in a classroom: 

Journaling: At the end of each work period, have students write an entry summarizing what they worked on, what worked well, what didn’t, and why. Sentence starters and clear rubrics or guidelines will help students be successful. At the end of a case study project, as Costa and Kallick write, it’s helpful to have students “select significant learnings, envision how they could apply these learnings to future situations, and commit to an action plan to consciously modify their behaviors.”

Interviews: While working on a case study, students can interview each other about their progress and learning. Teachers can interview students individually or in small groups to assess their learning process and their progress.

Student discussion: Discussions can be unstructured—students can talk about what they worked on that day in a think-pair-share or as a full class—or structured, using Socratic seminars or fishbowl discussions. If your class is tackling a case study in small groups, create a second set of small groups with a representative from each of the case study groups so that the groups can share their learning.

4 Tips for Setting Up a Case Study

1. Identify a problem to investigate: This should be something accessible and relevant to students’ lives. The problem should also be challenging and complex enough to yield multiple solutions with many layers.

2. Give context: Think of this step as a movie preview or book summary. Hook the learners to help them understand just enough about the problem to want to learn more.

3. Have a clear rubric: Giving structure to your definition of quality group work and products will lead to stronger end products. You may be able to have your learners help build these definitions.

4. Provide structures for presenting solutions: The amount of scaffolding you build in depends on your students’ skill level and development. A case study product can be something like several pieces of evidence of students collaborating to solve the case study, and ultimately presenting their solution with a detailed slide deck or an essay—you can scaffold this by providing specified headings for the sections of the essay.

Problem-Based Teaching Resources

There are many high-quality, peer-reviewed resources that are open source and easily accessible online.

• The National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science at the University at Buffalo built an online collection of more than 800 cases that cover topics ranging from biochemistry to economics. There are resources for middle and high school students.
• Models of Excellence , a project maintained by EL Education and the Harvard Graduate School of Education, has examples of great problem- and project-based tasks—and corresponding exemplary student work—for grades pre-K to 12.
• The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning at Purdue University is an open-source journal that publishes examples of problem-based learning in K–12 and post-secondary classrooms.
• The Tech Edvocate has a list of websites and tools related to problem-based learning.

In their book Problems as Possibilities , Linda Torp and Sara Sage write that at the elementary school level, students particularly appreciate how they feel that they are taken seriously when solving case studies. At the middle school level, “researchers stress the importance of relating middle school curriculum to issues of student concern and interest.” And high schoolers, they write, find the case study method “beneficial in preparing them for their future.”

Center for Teaching

Case studies.

Print Version

Case studies are stories that are used as a teaching tool to show the application of a theory or concept to real situations. Dependent on the goal they are meant to fulfill, cases can be fact-driven and deductive where there is a correct answer, or they can be context driven where multiple solutions are possible. Various disciplines have employed case studies, including humanities, social sciences, sciences, engineering, law, business, and medicine. Good cases generally have the following features: they tell a good story, are recent, include dialogue, create empathy with the main characters, are relevant to the reader, serve a teaching function, require a dilemma to be solved, and have generality.

Instructors can create their own cases or can find cases that already exist. The following are some things to keep in mind when creating a case:

• What do you want students to learn from the discussion of the case?
• What do they already know that applies to the case?
• What are the issues that may be raised in discussion?
• How will the case and discussion be introduced?
• What preparation is expected of students? (Do they need to read the case ahead of time? Do research? Write anything?)
• What directions do you need to provide students regarding what they are supposed to do and accomplish?
• Do you need to divide students into groups or will they discuss as the whole class?
• Are you going to use role-playing or facilitators or record keepers? If so, how?
• What are the opening questions?
• How much time is needed for students to discuss the case?
• What concepts are to be applied/extracted during the discussion?
• How will you evaluate students?

To find other cases that already exist, try the following websites:

• The National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science , University of Buffalo. SUNY-Buffalo maintains this set of links to other case studies on the web in disciplines ranging from engineering and ethics to sociology and business
• A Journal of Teaching Cases in Public Administration and Public Policy , University of Washington

For more information:

• World Association for Case Method Research and Application

Book Review :  Teaching and the Case Method , 3rd ed., vols. 1 and 2, by Louis Barnes, C. Roland (Chris) Christensen, and Abby Hansen. Harvard Business School Press, 1994; 333 pp. (vol 1), 412 pp. (vol 2).

Teaching Guides

Quick Links

• Services for Departments and Schools
• Examples of Online Instructional Modules

• Case Teaching Resources

Case Teaching Online Resources

Case Teaching Online

The resources on this page are designed to help you use the power of the case method online.

You will find a 30-page master guide on case teaching online and several tip sheets which are included in the guide and available as standalone PDFs.

Case Teaching Online Master Guide

Tip sheet: managing an online case discussion, tip sheet: making the most of breakout rooms, tip sheet: how to use polling, tip sheet: adapting to asynchronous case teaching, editable template: case analysis companion, tip sheet: incorporating audiovisual case materials online, online-friendly teaching plans, multimedia cases.

Using Case Studies to Teach

Why Use Cases?

Many students are more inductive than deductive reasoners, which means that they learn better from examples than from logical development starting with basic principles. The use of case studies can therefore be a very effective classroom technique.

Case studies are have long been used in business schools, law schools, medical schools and the social sciences, but they can be used in any discipline when instructors want students to explore how what they have learned applies to real world situations. Cases come in many formats, from a simple “What would you do in this situation?” question to a detailed description of a situation with accompanying data to analyze. Whether to use a simple scenario-type case or a complex detailed one depends on your course objectives.

Most case assignments require students to answer an open-ended question or develop a solution to an open-ended problem with multiple potential solutions. Requirements can range from a one-paragraph answer to a fully developed group action plan, proposal or decision.

Common Case Elements

Most “full-blown” cases have these common elements:

• A decision-maker who is grappling with some question or problem that needs to be solved.
• A description of the problem’s context (a law, an industry, a family).
• Supporting data, which can range from data tables to links to URLs, quoted statements or testimony, supporting documents, images, video, or audio.

Case assignments can be done individually or in teams so that the students can brainstorm solutions and share the work load.

The following discussion of this topic incorporates material presented by Robb Dixon of the School of Management and Rob Schadt of the School of Public Health at CEIT workshops. Professor Dixon also provided some written comments that the discussion incorporates.

Advantages to the use of case studies in class

A major advantage of teaching with case studies is that the students are actively engaged in figuring out the principles by abstracting from the examples. This develops their skills in:

• Problem solving
• Analytical tools, quantitative and/or qualitative, depending on the case
• Decision making in complex situations
• Coping with ambiguities

Guidelines for using case studies in class

In the most straightforward application, the presentation of the case study establishes a framework for analysis. It is helpful if the statement of the case provides enough information for the students to figure out solutions and then to identify how to apply those solutions in other similar situations. Instructors may choose to use several cases so that students can identify both the similarities and differences among the cases.

Depending on the course objectives, the instructor may encourage students to follow a systematic approach to their analysis.  For example:

• What is the issue?
• What is the goal of the analysis?
• What is the context of the problem?
• What key facts should be considered?
• What alternatives are available to the decision-maker?
• What would you recommend — and why?

An innovative approach to case analysis might be to have students  role-play the part of the people involved in the case. This not only actively engages students, but forces them to really understand the perspectives of the case characters. Videos or even field trips showing the venue in which the case is situated can help students to visualize the situation that they need to analyze.

Accompanying Readings

Case studies can be especially effective if they are paired with a reading assignment that introduces or explains a concept or analytical method that applies to the case. The amount of emphasis placed on the use of the reading during the case discussion depends on the complexity of the concept or method. If it is straightforward, the focus of the discussion can be placed on the use of the analytical results. If the method is more complex, the instructor may need to walk students through its application and the interpretation of the results.

Leading the Case Discussion and Evaluating Performance

Decision cases are more interesting than descriptive ones. In order to start the discussion in class, the instructor can start with an easy, noncontroversial question that all the students should be able to answer readily. However, some of the best case discussions start by forcing the students to take a stand. Some instructors will ask a student to do a formal “open” of the case, outlining his or her entire analysis.  Others may choose to guide discussion with questions that move students from problem identification to solutions.  A skilled instructor steers questions and discussion to keep the class on track and moving at a reasonable pace.

In order to motivate the students to complete the assignment before class as well as to stimulate attentiveness during the class, the instructor should grade the participation—quantity and especially quality—during the discussion of the case. This might be a simple check, check-plus, check-minus or zero. The instructor should involve as many students as possible. In order to engage all the students, the instructor can divide them into groups, give each group several minutes to discuss how to answer a question related to the case, and then ask a randomly selected person in each group to present the group’s answer and reasoning. Random selection can be accomplished through rolling of dice, shuffled index cards, each with one student’s name, a spinning wheel, etc.

Tips on the Penn State U. website: https://sites.psu.edu/pedagogicalpractices/case-studies/

If you are interested in using this technique in a science course, there is a good website on use of case studies in the sciences at the National Science Teaching Association.